The Rep link vs. the helpful Yes link
 

Whenever I try to use the Rep link to award reputation points I seem to always get The Yes link will work in that case, but the Rep link allows a short comment to be entered, which I want to do, sometimes.

I do this rarely. The last time I tried (just now), I hadn't given that particular user any points recently, and I've certainly "spread some Reputation around"

Bug? Just me? Thoughts?

No, it isn't just you.

The "Did you find this post helpful?" link will always work, but if you use it first, you will not be able to give reputation through the "Rep" link. So if you want to give reputation with both links; you would need to give reputation through the "Rep" link first if you want give reputation to the same post - or you will get the message "You cannot give reputation to the same post twice".

But if you have given reputation through the "Rep" link to that particular member recently, you'll get the message you're talking about. Also, I got a message (don't remember exactly what it said) like "You cannot give anymore reputation for x amount of something?".

I asked a very similar question myself a while back now, and as I suspected, there is a time based condition that prevents giving reputation to the same member once that time based condition is reached.

I understand that one can't use both links on the same post. And I can certainly use the Yes link if the Rep link won't let me. I wonder how long I have to wait...or do I have to use the Rep link on other member(s) before the block of a particular member will be lifted? Time alone doesn't seem to do it.

Again, for awarding rep, probably either works, but the Rep link allows a very short comment, where the Yes link does not. Sometimes you just want to give a specific "attaboy"...

I found that giving reputation through the "Rep" link to other members seems to enable giving reputation to the same member quicker - so if I gave reputation to you through the "Rep" link, and then I gave it to someone else; it would shorten the time period to be able to give you reputation again through the "Rep" link. So no, as Jeremy said in the post I linked before; there's both a time period as well as a member component to it as well.

If I see a really well written answer/comment I like to give reputation through the "Rep" link - because it adds more reputation, given that the "Did you find this post helpful?" link is only 1 point worth of reputation.

Yes you can. As jsb mentioned, just click on the Rep button first, then the Yes button. The order is important.

I too would be interested as to what the conditions are for being able to give repeated rep to the same member, although perhaps this may not be revealed in order to prevent potential gaming of the system.

In general, I use the Yes button when the answer contributes to the solving of the thread in question or asks an important question which will help resolve it. I don't use the Rep button nearly as much as I should, but when I do it is for answers that are over and beyond the call that I find very illuminating, or like you where I want to leave a specific message for that user.

I've also noticed that using the Rep button will give the poster in question more than one point, depending on the current reputation of the person clicking the button. For that reason I sometimes use the button for new users who provide good feedback after asking a good question. That gives them a nice points boost to set them on their way.

How about adding the ability to give a comment if you clicked on the "Yes" link instead of the "Rep" link on the members sidebar there?

And/or also, if more than just one person has found your post to be "helpful" (using the "Yes" link instead of the "Rep" link), you get more reputation points because of that. Like for example if say 2 people clicked the "Yes" link, then instead of just 2 points, the 1 point would therefore be say multiplied by the number of member's that clicked the "Yes" link. So in this example instead of just 2 points, the member in that case would get 4 points ? (While it would still show "2 members found this post helpful" on the actual post(s) concerned.)

I really don't know if any of that can be easily done, but I figured it's still worth "putting it out there" all the same...

Hopefully saying the following (if I'm right of course) doesn't game the system...

I'd say it would work something like, the forum software keeps track of which members you've given reputation to before, and the more you give reputation to the same member, some value/variable is increased in the forum software, which further extends the "ban" on giving that same member more reputation through the "Rep" link.

This implies that the "Did you find this post helpful?" bit is more like a separate part of the reputation system (I guess something like an "add-on" if you will), and therefore the "Rep" link is basically the reputation system itself, while the "Did you find this post helpful?" is like a separate entity that just adds to the reputation system itself.

Can't say for sure, but that's my take on it until corrected.

Suggestion: How about getting rid of the rep thing altogether and just 'communicating' our appreciation for others posts?

From the posts here, it seems to me that it's quite flawed. e.g. if hydrurga makes several brilliant posts in one thread, I'm not allowed to increase their rep, until I've "spread some more around"...

This is based on a premise that hydrurga could not conceivably have made so many excellent posts in that one thread - so automatically: suspicious.

I would say there are a few questions:

- Why do we need "rep"?
- If we do need it, what is it supposed to reflect?
- Why does it need to be an accurate reflection anything?
- Why does it need mechanisms in place to prevent abuse / deviations from intended use?
- If member A has a fanboy called member B, who follows him around giving rep to every post, who cares exactly?

And a few points to consider:

- Bear in mind that, there are Linux distribution developers / project leaders, who only need to say what they had for lunch last night and it's an automatic 15 rep points.

- Equally if you go to Random Linux Distro's subforum and praise Random Linux Distro and it's developers, default wall papers, whatever, you will likely be hit with a hail of reputation points.

- If you go to the Windows vs Linux thread and tell everyone how bad windows is compared to Linux, you will also be in the reputation point mining business very quickly.

- You can also look at member X with 8000 posts and 2000 rep points, with a big long green bar and member Y with 2000 posts and 1000 rep points and... so what?

- While seemingly positive, rep can be and often is in fact, used negatively. For example member A and member B argue. Members X and Y, award rep to one of member A's retorts/flames against member B. i.e. they lend anonymous support to a flame war, by way of the reputation system.

tl;dr: My point is really - do we all just need to "get over ourselves" and the reputation point thing? Maybe, if Jeremy doesn't one day decide to bin the whole system, just not take the points, how/why they're awarded as seriously as some seem to?

Should you not use a more realistic example? ;)

I'm actually in favour of the rep system. Individuals can currently opt out of it if they wish, while it remains one of the incentives for some folk to contribute to the forum. I don't take the points too seriously, but admit that it has been a nice feeling for me personally to pass some of the rep point milestones as a measure of other people's appreciation. That probably says a bit for my own psychology, but I'm sure that I'm not alone in that regard. I don't see any real costs, so the benefits outweigh the costs in my eyes.

As this site is based off vBulletin:

Unless something specific has been done with the reputation system then normal "Give Rep" will add to the users score with a calculated amount based on a number of factors including your own reputation value. The "Helpful Yes" adds a generally fixed amount to the receivers score.

The normal reputation system doesn't allow you to Rep the same person without spreading the love around a bit, but the "Helpful" mod doesn't follow those rules.

I see there as being two main reasons for rep:

1. It works as a reliability meter. It is definitely not infallible, but it gives users an indication of who is likely to impart more appropriate advice over someone else.

2. It's akin to a 'reward' for good posting and dedication to helping others.

There are some users here who are help vampires, and this shows by their low reputation-to-post-count ratio [i.e. high post count, low rep]. If you are the kind of user who has to ask hundreds of questions regularly and not give anything back to the community, you are neither a good Linux user nor a good forum member and you should receive little kudos. Seeing as LQ is not the kind of forum where one user can explicitly tell another to sod off, depriving someone of reputation is a way of expressing dissent inoffensively and informing others about a user's posting habits.

Remember, if you do not like or agree with the reputation system, you can demonstrate this by disabling your own, as some forum members have done.

Well one of my main point above is to the effect that "it may not"... but you've said it there - it's not infallible. So really, it's not of that much use.

You use/interpret it one way, someone else use/interprets it another way. Another doesn't much care either way.
Or they may just post a lot in the offtopic section (or in lots of feedback threads about about the rep system)? Either way, the post count doesn't mean a lot in such cases.

In my experience here over the years, I've seen numerous "solved" threads, where the one offering the solutions hasn't got even a single point for their trouble. At the other extreme, I've seen plenty of "I agree with this guy!" style "rep'ing" - plus the "backing up" of a particular side in a flame war / petty dispute.
You can disable the display of the points, but you cannot disable the reputation functions. It can still be awarded to you and you can still award it to others. This has been brought up many times before.

Again, what I'm saying is, don't necessarily change it, or think to get rid of it, but certainly it's better not to take it seriously nor worry too much about how it works, etc...

People already do that, regardless of whether they give any reputation or not.

I'm not sure it actually is a matter of "need" really, it's just another feature you can choose to use or not use - as said, it's up to you.

Other than roughly how helpful you maybe, probably not much. Personally for me, it's simply a guide that you can take seriously and personally, or you can just use it (as I do) as a rough guide on how helpful others have found you to be.

How would it be an "accurate reflection" of anything? So no, it doesn't need and never will be accurate. Is any OS you know 100% perfect? No system I'm aware of is; so why does the reputation have to be?

Because there is human beings using it. Why do we need laws? Because nobody would be safe if we didn't, and the same reasons you were talking about - members giving each other reputation because they are a "fan" of them. I must say on that issue; a lot of the reputation I have is actually from the OP's I've responded to, and if nothing else is certainly not from any "fans".

Probably member A and member B.

Well yeah, so why does the reputation matter then, when you can opt out of it or just ignore it? I can't help but think that would be the advice if we were talking about posts instead.

Indeed.

There is only one non-computing-related board on this forum, the "general" board, and posts in that section do not increment post count, neither can reputation be awarded there.

Good idea - I must post more in this thread!

It does function very much as a Facebook like button, but I see no way of changing this. As we all know from software, there can be a disparity between design intent and user implementation. And this is one of the ways in which things develops [not always for the best though, I agree].

Again, I see this as relative. I personally always look at it when reading the posts of others.

I do enjoy our debates.

Ah yes, I learned a while ago not to be miffed if I provide an acknowledged solution but the post containing that solution isn't marked as useful, particularly if I've devoted quite a time to the thread. I just put it down to the user not knowing that they should do that (although that's a bit more difficult to believe for the occasional longer-term posters who still don't mark solutions as useful after all this time), or that they're so busy running around the house/office shouting "Yay! That's the solution!" that they forget to mark the post in all their excitement. ;)

*If I remember*, I do try to mark such posts as useful when I see solutions or other posts from other members that have gone unappreciated. If nothing else, it helps future viewers of the thread to see where the important posts are in it.

You're right of course, I forgot about that...
That's exactly my point - it may not be used as designed, but probably not much point worrying about it or trying to redesign it.

How to design a better, less imperfect system? Not sure. Not really sure if there's a need or for any "social network" style bells and whistles if you ask me (I will still use it while it's there though and won't "disable" it as it cannot be properly disabled).
My points were not really arguments, just intended as food for thought.

All of that sounds reasonable and plausible to me. For some it's just not very important, they may have shown their appreciation/gratitude in their replies and just not really connect with the whole "vote up" / "like" thing or realise it's import to some (it may not be important to them, so they may assume the same applies to others).

:hattip:

//edit: question I just thought of - so if someone turns it off ("disables" it), what is your honest impression of them...?