Rep

Why can't people with a neutral rep contribute to a positive reputation? Or at least add up to a point?

Possibly because those who do not know much may not be able to determine what good advice is. It seems like a safety precaution.

Oh okay, seems fair enough I guess.

If negative rep is red does that mean a man named John C. that has all red rep is the baddest man around?

Absolutely

John just likes the color red.

Haha I love when you hover over it and it says "John likes the colour red"

Must be an echo in here...

Oh sorry, I didn't see that post

Must be an echo in here....here.............here....................................here.

Yea I get it,

Olivia97 said:

Yea I get it,

Click to expand...

I was actually playfully teasing Kaysie Olivia, not you!

I get hit with bad rep for telling people the truth oh.... and being "rude, sarcastic, offensive and argumentative " , most of the bad rep is from what could be termed "noobs", fortunately they cant do too much damage to rep, I would like to see it remain that way.

xxianxx said:

I get hit with bad rep for telling people the truth oh.... and being "rude, sarcastic, offensive and argumentative " , most of the bad rep is from what could be termed "noobs", fortunately they cant do too much damage to rep, I would like to see it remain that way.

Click to expand...

I'm renowned for being a tad outspoken & speaking my mind is a regular occurrence lol - but I'd rather hear the truth / facts over the fluffy politically correct softly-softly approach. When it comes to animal welfare or non existent basic animal care, that's when I get riled up!

I like to call the approach
"Harsh but Fair!"

Personally I like reading your responses Ian sometimes I read a post & can't wait for your reply to appear... 'Cause you know it will

Oh & sarcasm is awesome!

*thumbs up

PS - I don't know what this rep thingy is you all are talking about lol



<3 >o_o< <3

Nikki71 said:

PS - I don't know what this rep thingy is you all are talking about lol

Click to expand...

The little green squares on the left under your avatar when you post. Right under comments. Rep can be given through clicking the traditional balance symbol right under that next to the report post (caution symbol) and online dot.

Reputation should be given for good information, and I think the ideal is that it displays whose post should have more weight than others when giving educated answers - it's a good system when paid attention to, given that anybody can post here. For example, if someone with grey neutral reputation bars (one that has no rep points) gives a conflicting opinion to say, someone with 11 bars like our beloved moderator Kaysie, the reputation bars may give some clue as to what information can be trusted.

That's the reputation system as I view it. Someone who knows what they're talking about or gives good answers on the subjects they know will earn reputation quickly. People can also receive red (negative) rep, which should indicate that they may not be trustworthy in their information. Excepting John. He apparently, as previously posted, just likes the color red.

You can see where you have received reputation and on what posts up at the very top green bar by clicking "user cp."

esn said:

The little green squares on the left under your avatar when you post. Right under comments. Rep can be given through clicking the traditional balance symbol right under that next to the report post (caution symbol) and online dot.

Reputation should be given for good information, and I think the ideal is that it displays whose post should have more weight than others when giving educated answers - it's a good system when paid attention to, given that anybody can post here. For example, if someone with grey neutral reputation bars (one that has no rep points) gives a conflicting opinion to say, someone with 11 bars like our beloved moderator Kaysie, the reputation bars may give some clue as to what information can be trusted.

That's the reputation system as I view it. Someone who knows what they're talking about or gives good answers on the subjects they know will earn reputation quickly. People can also receive red (negative) rep, which should indicate that they may not be trustworthy in their information. Excepting John. He apparently, as previously posted, just likes the color red.

You can see where you have received reputation and on what posts up at the very top green bar by clicking "user cp."

Click to expand...

LOL, I nearly fell for that Elena, you obviously missed the sarcasm.

xxianxx said:

LOL, I nearly fell for that Elena, you obviously missed the sarcasm.

Click to expand...

Man, really? I was actually trying to be helpful I should go back to being facetious.

esn said:

The little green squares on the left under your avatar when you post. Right under comments. Rep can be given through clicking the traditional balance symbol right under that next to the report post (caution symbol) and online dot.

Reputation should be given for good information, and I think the ideal is that it displays whose post should have more weight than others when giving educated answers - it's a good system when paid attention to, given that anybody can post here. For example, if someone with grey neutral reputation bars (one that has no rep points) gives a conflicting opinion to say, someone with 11 bars like our beloved moderator Kaysie, the reputation bars may give some clue as to what information can be trusted.

That's the reputation system as I view it. Someone who knows what they're talking about or gives good answers on the subjects they know will earn reputation quickly. People can also receive red (negative) rep, which should indicate that they may not be trustworthy in their information. Excepting John. He apparently, as previously posted, just likes the color red.

You can see where you have received reputation and on what posts up at the very top green bar by clicking "user cp."

Click to expand...

Very helpful indeed thank you

I'm using a mobile phone & an app called tapatalk (which explains why I'm on soooo much ) so cannot see these rep colour bars - one day IF I ever get my stinking pc to work I'll check out the rep thingy



<3 >o_o< <3

esn said:

The little green squares on the left under your avatar when you post. Right under comments. Rep can be given through clicking the traditional balance symbol right under that next to the report post (caution symbol) and online dot.

Reputation should be given for good information, and I think the ideal is that it displays whose post should have more weight than others when giving educated answers - it's a good system when paid attention to, given that anybody can post here. For example, if someone with grey neutral reputation bars (one that has no rep points) gives a conflicting opinion to say, someone with 11 bars like our beloved moderator Kaysie, the reputation bars may give some clue as to what information can be trusted.

That's the reputation system as I view it. Someone who knows what they're talking about or gives good answers on the subjects they know will earn reputation quickly. People can also receive red (negative) rep, which should indicate that they may not be trustworthy in their information. Excepting John. He apparently, as previously posted, just likes the color red.

You can see where you have received reputation and on what posts up at the very top green bar by clicking "user cp."

Click to expand...

Nice explanation Elena.

With regard to the discussion on posting, remember that we have members of all ages and educational/expertise levels (or lack thereof) on the forum. Tactful and respectful answers are always appropriate.

Jan said:

With regard to the discussion on posting, remember that we have members of all ages and educational/expertise levels (or lack thereof) on the forum. Tactful and respectful answers are always appropriate.

Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with your statement some people actually need to be told bluntly "You are killing your axolotl !", even then they dont take the hint and make excuses or plainly think they are being lied to,it is very frustrating to see and the end result, unfortunately, is often sarcasm. Examples of animal abuse and neglect are rife in this forum and seem to be excused by many members when giving advise, I care more for the welfare of a mistreated animal than the feelings of a person who by lack of research, lack of care or in many cases plain stupidity has led them to seek advice, often far too late. If you can spend one week posting in the sick axolotl section of this site without banging your head on the nearest hard surface every couple of hours I would be amazed. When you try to explain to somebody that keeping their axolotl in water that has the same ammonia content of a sewer is bad, or that actually feeding the correct diet is a good thing , actually feeding them at all in a couple of threads, removing the plecostomus/goldfish/algae eater from their tank as it is a potential hazard only to be ignored and responded to in the same old way "Its all right I been doing it for the last month and theres been no problems!", is depressing to say the least. So if any body wants to ignore advice I offer, advice which is all ready available if they search the history of this site, they can feel free to ignore the sarcasm as well.