Antipoints

[stflook]

I think the comment field in the antipoints submission box needs to be a required field. I'm hoping it will stop people from being so liberal with antipoints that aren't deserved. I don't know if anybody else has had this problem, but I have. I at least want to see a reason why I'm getting these points. It could also be used to help weed out the antipoints abusers (garbage comments).

[Shmoo]

Your upset cause you dont got any. It's okay though, respect me and I'll respect you.

[stflook]

Actually, that's not true, I used to have some until lately. I have had a problem with people giving me negative antipoints with no explanation on posts that seem perfectly fine to me. If I could just get a REASON, I would be happy.

[Shmoo]

That sucks, how do you give someone negative antipoints?

[stflook]

You just say you disapprove in the antipoints box.

P.S. Please don't give me any. I didn't do anything.

[Shmoo]

Oh yea, I see what you mean now. Don't worry about it man.

[Simon Templer]

stflook...

I agree with you... I think it would be a good idea to require an explanation of why you recieve GOOD or BAD antipoints.

I think it would prevent people from assigning points carelessly!

Let me give you an example: Today I checked my antipoints and found that a few had "grey" incons, and one had a "red". None of these had explanations! :mad:

:confused: One thing I would like to know is... Do the grey one's count against you?, are they the result of someone voting negative but not having enough seniority to affect your total. And do the red ones mean that a member with more seniority voted negative?

A little clarification from anyone would be appreciated!

Thanks

[stflook]

Thanks for the support.

I second that question. What ARE the grey antipoints?

[Simon Templer]

There is a thread for that question. The Grey one's mean "balance". If you right click on them and select properties you will notice the filename is: "antipointsbalance.gif"

Here's the link to the thread:
http://www.antionline.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118944

[ZeroOne]

That force-the-explanation-to-be-given -idea was originally mine (okay, someone else may also have thought this, but I still say it was me who posted it first!), but I've now been thinking this again, so here's my, I think quite a good :), new idea:

Now you can give different amount of points depending on if you are a Junior Member, a Member or a Senior Member. What if we add a second variable: anonymity! The formula would be (or could be something like) this:

Jr Member Member Senior
Anon. 1 2 4
Name 2 4 8

In "Give AntiPoints" box there would be then a new checkbox, "Publish my name".

Waiting for your comments!

-ZeroOne :cool:

[stflook]

Yea, it probably was you. I remember you suggested that the last time I complained about this. I can credit you for it in the first post if you want.

[Kezil]

Names may not be such a good idea, REASONS yes, but names can have bad side effects such as: you give negative antipoints for a post, but the person you gave them to is extremely vengeful and thinks their god almighty, and unfortunately your name was required with the message...Next thing you know, your down x amount of antipoints.
Now a question: anyone have any good ideas how to make a requirement to give reasons work? Someone could just press a few keys or put in jibberish and it could get past. Maybe a penalty if the recipient complains? Then again, someone would have to sift through all the complaints.
Thanks for your time.

[stflook]

The antipoints system is supposed to weed the good users from the bad. The policy is that anybody who is caught abusing the antipoints system will have their account deleted without question. Jibbersih comments could be used to weed out such antipoints abusers, and have them brought to justice without 10,000,000 complaints first, then a massive manhunt. Right now, I am not aware of any way to stop the antipoints abusers. Comments like "You're a nerdy whore." would also constitute gibberish comments. At least they should in my opinion, since it would be even worse than "skgj;askgjsdklh". Does that sound good to you?

[xstonedogx]

Requiring names would have the undesirable side effect of less users utilizing the antipoints system. Of those users who continued to utilize the antipoints system, they would be less likely to give negative antipoints. It would skew the results in favor of positive antipoints. This would result in an inaccurate representation of one's prestige. An anonymous system will provide the truest representation.

I fully support the idea of requiring comments. In fact, I had already determined I would not give a user antipoints without an explanation, even before I discovered this thread.

Requiring comments would be a boon to the antipoints system. While this would also likely have the same side effect mentioned above, in this case it would be a positive change. It would greatly increase the quality (worth) of the antipoints in two ways. Firstly, it would give the user feedback, aiding the user in self-improvement. Secondly, it would prevent the "casual" gifting of antipoints. If a user cannot put in words why he feels a user deserves antipoints, what meaning do the antipoints have? None.

[Eating_Scarlett]

This has nothing to do with antipoints, but the gold and purple 'theme' colours of this site are horrible. The yellow looks like the spit up of a new born baby, and the purple reminds me of the wiggles.

I do believe the person who chose these colours is either on drugs, or colour blind.


PS. utramp rocks.

[Eating_Scarlett]

Seriously though, stop your ****ing whining and get over it.

[stflook]

If you don't like my suggestion, that's fine. You could at least try to be a decent person about it though.

[DISLEX]

I would just like to say that I am with everyone on the "You MUST have a comment' for when giving either good OR bad AntiPoints.


Nerdy Whore,

[Flack]

I am new to AntiOnline, and I was wonderng if any one thatreads this would help me out. I have no i9dea what these Antipoints re for or how you become a "membr" or "senior member". Would sme one pleaseexplain?

Thanx

[stflook]

0-29 posts = Junior Member
30-99 posts = Member
100+ posts = Senior Member


The purpose of AntiPoints is to separate the good users from the bad. If you have meaningful things to say, then theoretically, users will give you positive antipoints. If you post things that are harassing, insulting, offensive, etc., users will theoretically give you negative antipoints. Generally, the more positive AntiPoints you have, the more respected you are.

Does this answer your question?

[Chris]

I have the Solution (http://www.everydevel.com/) =D

Seriously though, I mean Scarlett has more "AntiPoints" than me, something has to be wrong, right? right?

[stflook]

That's partly why I'm proposing this change. I have been the victim of unfair negative antipoints before, and I have been getting a lot of undeserved ones lately too. Luckily, none of the recent ones have been given to me by anybody with enough power to effect my score, so I guess you could say I have been getting a lot of balance points with negative comments. If they were deserved, I wouldn't be complaining.

[Wolf]

Originally posted by DISLEX
I would just like to say that I am with everyone on the "You MUST have a comment' for when giving either good OR bad AntiPoints.




But, what would stop someone from giving the same vanilla "Well thought out post." or "I disagree with you." type of comments to everyone? On the surface, it looks legitimate, but not well thought out to any great detail.

On the other hand, if someone's gotta come up with a long winded explanation as to thier thoughts on the post, they'd might as well share with everyone, and post a message publicly.

my $0.02

[Eating_Scarlett]

Is something WRONG with you people? 'The more antipoints you get the more RESPECTED you are'?!

Umm.. who in their right mind judges how much people respect them by 'antipoints'? *snorts*

Why are you all whinging about this so much? I say just get rid of the ****ing thing, that way, we won't hear anymore shit about it.

****in' hell.. you're worse than a bunch of whiny women.

Chris.. I have more antipoints than you cause I'm better looking.

[Wolf]

Originally posted by DISLEX
I would just like to say that I am with everyone on the "You MUST have a comment' for when giving either good OR bad AntiPoints.




But, what would stop someone from giving the same vanilla "Well thought out post." or "I disagree with you." type of comments to everyone? On the surface, it looks legitimate, but not well thought out to any great detail.

On the other hand, if someone's gotta come up with a long winded explanation as to thier thoughts on the post, they'd might as well share with everyone, and post a message publicly.

my $0.02

[stflook]

Originally posted by Eating_Scarlett
Is something WRONG with you people? 'The more antipoints you get the more RESPECTED you are'?!

Umm.. who in their right mind judges how much people respect them by 'antipoints'? *snorts*

Why are you all whinging about this so much? I say just get rid of the ****ing thing, that way, we won't hear anymore shit about it.

****in' hell.. you're worse than a bunch of whiny women.

Chris.. I have more antipoints than you cause I'm better looking.

Once again, you can disagree with me if you want, or even dislike me. Hell, you can HATE me for all I care, but if you want to act like an ass, do it somewhere else please. This is supposed to be an intelligent thread. We don't need your input unless it's meaningful.

[Eating_Scarlett]

'Once again, you can disagree with me if you want, or even dislike me. Hell, you can HATE me for all I care, but if you want to act like an ass, do it somewhere else please. This is supposed to be an intelligent thread. We don't need your input unless it's meaningful.'

If I wanted to act like an ass, I would do it anywhere I damn well pleased. Since I'm NOT acting like an ass, I don't see the problem.

I don't need to hate you or dislike you, I don't know you, and I don't care. You're a whinger, a whiner, and I bet you have a small dick.

Serves you right.

[stflook]

Go ahead and say all you want. You have already made enough of an ass of yourself that nobody will listen to you anymore anyway. I don't know who's feelings you think you're hurting, but you just come off as a mild annoyance.

[jared_c]

I have a couple questions about antipoints....

When i'm viewing account info and look at the points I received there are the little colored dots next to each point. Is that the point status of the person giving me the point? They can't be the point type that they gave me because there is no "balance (gray)" antipoint, only positive and negative. So I am guessing that that has to be the person giving the point's status... right?

If they are the status, is there any way of knowing which type of point someone gave you? Obviously some people leave comments that give away what they gave you, but how do you know if they don't? Sometimes people give me an antipoint with no comment, and i dont know if that is a positive or negative point.

And last but not least, What is the point/dot ration? ie, How many positive antipoints do i need to get 2 green dots, then three green dots, and so on?

Just wondering about these for the past few days, and figured I would ask. Thanks.

[xstonedogx]

jared_c,

That's a good question. I received an icon that was grey, and my antipoints did not go up. But this does not answer the question. It may be grey because the user had a zero balance, or it may be grey because it did not give me any antipoints.

In answer to your question about the ratio between antipoints and dots:

Originally posted by JP:
Your "AntiPoints Rating" will be displayed underneath all of your posts. Only you will know your exact number of AntiPoints -- you can view this by clicking on the AntiPoints icon on the right hand side of your own post or through the "Account Overview" link under the "Your Account" box on the main page. For every 100 points positive or negative, you will gain another "AntiPoints Rating" light. After 5 lights, they will take twice as long to appear.

[TeKRoMaNCeR]

I'm very generous with my anti-points.. I actually give out (mostly) positive points to those who I feel deserve them, and (sometimes) negatives to people who.. well.. I'm sure you know who I'm talking about... I always give reasons for my points.. negative/positive, whatever.. I'll say.. very funny, or.. I'll try that.. or something like that.. and.. the recipient of the points can always click on the post link to see what the anti-pointer is refering to.. But.. generally.. some people.. the kind of people who like to deface web sites, and hack because they are lame.. would rather assign all negative points.. to destroy peoples reputations... I find that to be a legitimate point..

=]:

[stflook]

That is the EXACT problem I was having. Have you had a problem with that too?

[Eating_Scarlett]

Originally posted by stflook
That is the EXACT problem I was having. Have you had a problem with that too?

You talk too much.

[Eating_Scarlett]

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, m&ms

[freon]

Personally I don't think people should be too worried about negative AntiPoints. I think peoples' reputations are based more on what they actually say than on what a few people thought of what they said. I'd certainly not judge the value of what someone has to contribute by the snap conclusions people have jumped to after reading their past offerings.

Lord knows I'm not likely to say much on this board that's going to make me popular - but I still like to think that people are going to judge my posts individually by reading them and thinking at least a little about what I have to say. Frankly I think with AntiOnline's reputation in the hacker community and the computer underground, a nice low AntiPoints rating is infinitely preferrable to the e-kick-me sticker that a high one would tag me with.

I'd rather be unpopular than pure lowest common denominator - particularly on this site.

- Freon

[stflook]

Originally posted by freon
Personally I don't think people should be too worried about negative AntiPoints. I think peoples' reputations are based more on what they actually say than on what a few people thought of what they said. I'd certainly not judge the value of what someone has to contribute by the snap conclusions people have jumped to after reading their past offerings.

Lord knows I'm not likely to say much on this board that's going to make me popular - but I still like to think that people are going to judge my posts individually by reading them and thinking at least a little about what I have to say. Frankly I think with AntiOnline's reputation in the hacker community and the computer underground, a nice low AntiPoints rating is infinitely preferrable to the e-kick-me sticker that a high one would tag me with.

I'd rather be unpopular than pure lowest common denominator - particularly on this site.

- Freon

That's true, but since Antipoint ratings are based on how popular you are from your posts. They're also meant to be a measure of how intelligent and mature other people think you are. So it can hurt you if you have a bad Antipoints rating.

[Stronzo]

I'm not saying antipoints are stupid, I'm saying people give antipoints stupidly. So, I definately agree with you stflook.

How bout this for a comment - they wrote my signature as a comment. Jeez. Good thing their antipoints were so negative that it didn't affect my total.

Another one. I wrote in the thread 'What would you do without a computer' (http://www.antionline.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=262827#post262827). Basically I wrote "I'd play sports and sail my boat (more)". For this, I get antipoints. :mad:

I think you should not be allowed to give out antipoints until you are a full 'member' (as opposed to Junior Member) or have a certain number of posts. That way, you will already have been judged by the more senior members of this community. If you write bad posts, they will give you antipoints, and therefore you will not be able to affect someone elses total.

Sorry about the rant, but I think there needs to be a change in the system.

[stflook]

Originally posted by Stronzo
I'm not saying antipoints are stupid, I'm saying people give antipoints stupidly. So, I definately agree with you stflook.

How bout this for a comment - they wrote my signature as a comment. Jeez. Good thing their antipoints were so negative that it didn't affect my total.

Another one. I wrote in the thread 'What would you do without a computer' (http://www.antionline.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=262827#post262827). Basically I wrote "I'd play sports and sail my boat (more)". For this, I get antipoints. :mad:

I think you should not be allowed to give out antipoints until you are a full 'member' (as opposed to Junior Member) or have a certain number of posts. That way, you will already have been judged by the more senior members of this community. If you write bad posts, they will give you antipoints, and therefore you will not be able to affect someone elses total.

Sorry about the rant, but I think there needs to be a change in the system.

I don't agree with your method, but at least we agree that the system is flawed and needs changing.

Here are a couple of my own horror stories with Antipoints:



I recently posted something as a joke and somebody apparently took it seriously and gave me negative Antipoints. That's fine if he makes a mistake, but look at his comment. "Lame and childish reply, nothing unexpected coming from you I suppose" I just want to know, how is that helping? I find that insulting and unnecessary.

I just got some balance points (but they were obviously intended to be negative) on something I posted a long time ago. It was my original post on the Net-Force guy. His comment was, "Nice signature. Take your own advice." Not only is that not helping, but in my opinion, that's downright Antipoints abuse. I find that one very hurtful. He had no reason that I can think of to give me that other than to be a jackass.

I hope JP acknowledges this thread soon. I don't care if he says "no" , but I at least want acknowledgement. I'm tired of being ignored. This thread has been here for weeks now, and is almost 4 pages long. I don't think I deserve to be ignored like this.

[pooja]

Take it easy stflook! There are many more important things in life worth giving a thot rather than these lame anti-points! Don't let some stupid remarks or antipoints disturb/upset u! u've done u're bit, let the other do their's!

This is just a forum, so just chill!
Don't sweat the small stuff...............................and its all small stuff! - Richard Carlson
:cool:


[QUOTE]Originally posted by stflook


I don't agree with your method, but at least we agree that the system is flawed and needs changing.

Here are a couple of my own horror stories with Antipoints:



I recently posted something as a joke and somebody apparently took it seriously and gave me negative Antipoints. That's fine if he makes a mistake, but look at his comment. "Lame and childish reply, nothing unexpected coming from you I suppose" I just want to know, how is that helping? I find that insulting and unnecessary.

I just got some balance points (but they were obviously intended to be negative) on something I posted a long time ago. It was my original post on the Net-Force guy. His comment was, "Nice signature. Take your own advice." Not only is that not helping, but in my opinion, that's downright Antipoints abuse. I find that one very hurtful. He had no reason that I can think of to give me that other than to be a jackass.

I hope JP acknowledges this thread soon. I don't care if he says "no" , but I at least want acknowledgement. I'm tired of being ignored. This thread has been here for weeks now, and is almost 4 pages long. I don't think I deserve to be ignored like this. [/QUOTE

[JP]

Greetings All:

The AntiPoints system is a lot more complicated than you people are making it out to be. It keeps track of DOZENS of variables, and considers all of them when a user assigns you points. We keep adding more variables as we see problems, so the system is constantly evolving and getting more intelligent.

The grey "balance" points that you see, are from the system blocking a user's attempt to "unfairly" give you negative, or positive, antipoints. This isn't to say that the post that you got grey "balance" antipoints on doesn't deserve the negative or positive points, it's that the system doesn't think the user deserves to give you the points that they did.

Why don't they "deserve" to give you those points? Well, that could be because of one of dozens of reasons. We'll keep the exact reasons between us and the AntiPoints system
:D

Just trust that I'm actively keeping an eye on the AntiPoints system, and making sure that things on the system get added/removed/changed when they need it. It will only get better as time passes.....