Hi,
That might be true, but you must also know that 'negative' has a lot more impact then a (lot of) 'positive'. This thread is an example, the only thing we seem to be discussing lately is something that's hardly used. A lot of strong feelings about only 1.25% if you ask me.

Openly quibbling about the rep system outside this thread (one example given in post #918, and I don't think this post measures up to fear mongering......). I've seen more examples over the last couple weeks, but I'm not going to start looking for them.

I'm a bit surprised that you don't share this concern about LQ getting harsher. You just handed (just about) all the members a tool that can be used to down rep people for whatever reason the down-repper pleases......

I thought it was clear that I did not see them as being a real moderator....

The negative rep is used to "punish" people for stuff that real (!!) moderators should deal with. But we, the none-moderators, have been given a tool that can be used to play (!!) moderator.

And yes, there are "repercussions": The recipient of the negative rep will have (a little?) less credibility because of his negative rep and more importantly: S/he also might question the rightfulness of the down-rep. With a real moderator it is very simple: One violates the rules and gets the appropriate punishment (which are clear and known by you and all the mods) and you have the final say if a discussions about it flares up.

Maybe the best solution would be removing the negative rep part altogether and let the moderators do what they have done quit well for all these years.

Hi,

Whenever this is done then a member, newbie, senior or whomever should step in. LQ will never become a playground. Too many user that believe in what they do here at LQ and respectfully participate. Flamewars still happen but I really don't want to get into too many of late.

I don't always agree with the Mods here at LQ but have found most to be fair and respectful when participating. Sure sometimes people have been spanked when necessary and at other times I've found the situation could have been handled different by the participants (mods included).

I'm on the forums a lot lately because of injuries preventing manual labor. If I see some poor action, I'll just report then comment.

Thankfully we have members with some restraint and others that just jump in. I'm trying to be a mixed balance. Re-read the post then compose my reply. Re-read my post then read the post I'm replying to again before I submit. Lately, I've found that I just back out. Keeps my blood pressure at a tolerable point. :)
:hattip:

Sorry if I missed it, but is the reputation system disabled in the HCL section on purpose?

I agree, this should not be allowed, as long as the original down rep was never made, because it was against the guidelines or at least not in accordance with them.

I guess at least, these examples can be used to formulate some guidelines, maybe ?

From my last attempt to make a list, I can only agree on down rep for dangerous or useless advice.

I would agree that, emotionally, a negative rep has a significantly higher impact than a positive one. Keep in mind the number of members that are discussing the negative rep in this thread are *very* small and don't necessarily represent the opinions of the overall LQ membership.

I'm very concerned at any solid indication that LQ is or is perceive as getting harsher. I'm not sure why you'd think otherwise.

The is 100% untrue. Only senior members ever had this ability and they represent a vast minority of the LQ membership. As mentioned I've disabled the ability while we can add some parameters or guidelines. I'm also reconsidering who the ability will be re-enabled for.

There are many cases I can think of which may not warrant mod intervention, but involve activities that should be corrected. I'm hoping we can rely on the collective wisdom and participation of our most senior members for this (and ideally other items as well), but it's possible this won't be the case.

--jeremy

I was never in any non-forum sections of LQ.

--jeremy

First of all, I would like to apologize for using the rep system at all. I won't make that mistake again.

Secondly, I would like to apologize for discussing the reputation system in a thread in which it was not a part of the original topic. That too will not happen again.

As far as the meaning of the above quote, it is simple. I saw something that I felt was dangerous advice with real world consequences. Prevention of this, I thought, was the primary intent of the negative rep. I therefore gave TobiSGD a negative rep which resulted in 1 point taken away from the 81 rep he had at the time. If I had not thought there had been a risk of real world consequences, I would not have used the rep system at all.

The outcry from others over the next few hours on my decision (along with up reps for other posts of his, I assume) resulted in his rep at the time of that quote of being 89 (he now has 99 with a bunch of the difference from the one point I took away from his 81 directly related to up reps in retaliation to my down rep, therefore he should be glad). On top of that, over the course of the day, people decided that I needed to be punished for my use of the reputation system, and took away 2 of my reputation points (note: these were not done because of anything I posted, just because I gave a neg rep they didn't agree with).

I felt at the time, and I still do, that the post that made me give a down rep to TobiSGD was dangerous and designed to be sent out as quickly as possible without regard to potential misunderstandings. My hope for giving the down rep was that he would use a few more words in future posts to make sure his intent was clear. Others felt his post was fine, and it was up to someone who didn't even have enough knowledge of Linux/Unix to know what man was, who posted from a Windows system and may not even have access to a shell, who was new to the community, to make sure nothing bad happened. I disagree with that attitude. I believe it is up to those with the knowledge to make sure their advice is at least harmless.

Thus, it has been demonstrated to me, that there are more people at LQ who do not care about making sure their posts are responsible and just want to get them out there than there are those of us who only give advice if they actually have the time to make a thoughtful answer that at a minimum isn't likely to be misinterpreted in a way that may cause harm. Which brings me to my final thought of the quote, I hope those individuals will put a bit more effort in their future posts, but I don't hold out much hope.

HTH

Forrest

Hi,

@forrestt

We all make mistake at times. I do understand your points and reasoning. Some members just make assumption when posting back to queries. I've found myself doing this sometimes.

I do participate on the Newbie forum a lot. LQ being a mixed community and personalities does require one to use caution whenever posting textually. If it was face to face then things would be handled differently.
Fortunately my past experience with foreign students has helped me to understand the communication barriers. I too can fall into the trap(s) you speak of, if I don't edit/re-read my post with the reader in mind. I personally try to prevent the inclusion of tech-speak but if I must then a link will be provided to at least give the reader means to understand my post(s).

Thankfully we have this forum and thread to vent or suggest things concerning the rep.

I can see your point but you must weigh yourself concerning the example that you speak of. Re-reading the Thread of concern does indicate that your intent was good. But the 'try' application as to a 'man command' will not harm. If you used something like 'Try rm -f *' then off course due harm would be of concern. I would suggest that a user perform the 'man rf' to get a understanding of the command along with options. Then mention the potential option '-f' and what it means when used with 'rm'.

We all cannot have structured English with proper grammar. But hopefully we can by example show other members the way by example.

The following links have helped me;
Netiquette is a set of social conventions that facilitate interaction over networks, ranging from Usenet and mailing lists to blogs and forums.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way is the 'Original'
How To Ask a Question by XavierP & GrapefruiTgirl is a great LQ post and is abbreviated from Raymond & Moen
How to Answer a Linux Question by Simon Bridge's is a excellent composition to aid us in good informational exchanges and should be a required read.

" Don't sweat the small stuff! And it's all small stuff". Great read and applicable here.

“Passions unguided are for the most part mere madness.”- Thomas Hobbes

The "try" application in that context can do harm because the question was what should I put down as my answer. If the question had been how do you do it, then I wouldn't have considered it harmful. But then again, I'm the idiot jerk that doesn't know what I'm talking about.

I understand your point that the OP might have thought that "man service" is the answer to his homework problem, and I understand that, but I still think that you overreacted.

First of all, if the OP knows that it's against the rules to post direct homework answers, then he wouldn't assume that it was one. Also, if the guy says he is studying Linux, you'd assume he would know about something as elementary the man command.

You could have just said "Note that the above is just a hint, not the actual answer", but I didn't see any reason to down-rep and offend TobiSGD.

And most of the up-reps TobiSGD got from that incident were from people who wanted to up-rep him to compensate for the unfair down-rep. But they probably didn't know that other people had done so before them.

Your concern was that the OP might blindly copy text from the forum and paste it into his homework. Obviously, if the OP does that, then it's no-one's fault but the OP's.

Hi,

No one to my knowledge ever said such to you. Don't be a drama queen here. We are all trying to help and to see from your perspective. As I said, a member should step in by aid if someone does provide erroneous information.
As to the homework LQ Rules, 'Do not expect LQ members to do your homework - you will learn much more by doing it yourself.' clearly states that the poster should not expect us to do the work. Not that we can't but it's best that the poster performs the work themselves.
:hattip:

@ MTK358

First of all, IT IS NOT AGAINST THE RULES TO POST DIRECT HOMEWORK ANSWERS. If I am wrong, then Jeremy needs to change the rule from to "Do not post homework answers" so the meaning is clear. As it stands now, people are free to post homework questions. And people are free to post homework answers. People are NOT allowed to EXPECT their homework to be answered. Not being allowed to EXPECT something does not prohibit it from being given to you. Therefore, the assumption that the post could not possibly be a homework answer is WRONG.

And it IS against Jeremy's desire to up rep someone simply because you disagree w/ the down rep.
I would also imagine that it is against his desire to down rep someone simply because you disagree w/ their down repping someone else. However, this is exactly what has happened in both directions. I personally do not care if anyone other than Jeremy finds fault in my actions. I do not feel I did ANYTHING wrong by down repping TobiSGD for that post, I do not feel that I should have been punished for that action, and I CERTAINLY do not feel that he should have been rewarded for something that I will always believe was irresponsible.

@ dugan

I agree that if the OP does that it is the OP's fault. However, I didn't rep based on the OP's actions, I repped based on the quality of the post. It would have taken close to NOTHING to create a response that would CLEARLY state that the OP shouldn't do that, and IMHO that was NOT clear from the response given. The only thing that can explain that is pure laziness.

@ onebuck

The implication is clear. I'm an idiot because I don't know how to use the rep system, I don't know how to understand English, and I believe something that nobody else does. I'm a jerk because I dare give someone a neg rep and have been duly told by quite a few people how wrong I was. And great, now I'm a drama queen ;). At least can't I be a drama king?


If I think the movie "Lost in Translation" sucked, I can give it Bill Murray a bad rep. If I think "Caddy Shack" was good, I can give him a good rep. However, I shouldn't give him any rep based on what my X wife thinks of him just because I disagree with her. Anybody that thought that response deserved giving TobiSGD a positive rep is lying to themselves. It may not have deserved a negative rep, but in no way was it a great response. It was mediocre at BEST. And if TobiSGD's response didn't deserve a negative rep, then I can't see how mine deserved a negative rep.

Forrest

So TobiSGD should have CLEARLY stated that the OP should not blindly copy and paste text from forums into his homework?

And you downrepped him for not CLEARLY stating that the OP should not blindly copy and paste text from forums into his homework?

And TobiSGD's advice was "dangerous" because it did not CLEARLY state that the OP should not blindly copy and paste text from forums into his homework?

For the SOLE reason that the question was "what should I put as the answer". If someone asks that question, then it needs to be clear that the answer you are giving is NOT what you should put as the answer if it is in fact NOT THE ANSWER.

I don't see why this is such a difficult standard to adhere to.