Tit-for-tat reputation

Remove all ads!

Ug. And you were doing pretty well up until this.

I seem to recall that NOG is married, so he probably gets "laid," as you so quaintly put it, as much as he likes. And yet he still may be concerned enough about his rep on a public message board to post a one paragraph thread about it (which means he has nothing "better to do," I guess)? This must be "butt-hurt!"

"Butt-hurt" is an illegitimate term intended to deligitimize a position someone has taken rather than addressing their argument or their case. It's used normally by teenagers on RPG-Codex type boards to shame others into feigning indifference, which is valued as a self-conscious 'I am above it all' trait in communities where most of the members live in their mothers' basements yet still think of themselves as 'edgy' and 'badass.'

You don't consider rep at SP to be meaningful ... fine. That doesn't mean NOG (or anyone else) can't or shouldn't, or that by voicing his opinion he is automatically exhibiting signs of being oversensitive by having been figuratively sodomized.

Lastly, all he did was ask for opinions anyway. He didn't presume to preach about it, so maybe the sensitivity and 'butthurt' actually lies with the persons who do ...?

 

Hey, thanks Splunge, appreciate it! Knowing I can be the king on these boards and having you to thank for it makes me feel all warm inside. So, how about spiltting that 25 bucks a pop fund with me, 50/50 pal? Huh? What do ya say?

 

Great post DR, made me laugh too.

I enjoy being part of the friendly community here and I think it's mainly thanks to the mature users (and I say that without referring to actual age Splunge) and of course thanks to Tal and the mods.

I give positive rep rather often when I think someone is being helpful, makes a really great post or just makes me smile (and that last category is important as real life can be a real pain sometimes).

I've also appreciated getting some rep points for some of my posts like the modlists I've posted for Fallout 3 and Dragon Age Origins. It's nice to know that fellow posters appreciate what you're trying to do.

I've only had one bad rep point (as far as I know) it was anonymous but I don't think I would have retaliated anyway because I don't believe it would have been constructive. I was annoyed because I felt it was a cheap way to make a point instead of debating on the forum or clearing things out with PMs. It was obvious that the person who bad repped me clearly didn't understand what I was saying and thought I was being offensive.

I've exchanged PMs with people with whom I can't possibly agree on anything and it helped me understand them a bit better. You don't have to agree with other posters to respect them and their right to express their views. I have given good rep to people with whom I didn't agree at times because they made a convincing point and actually brought something to the discussion.

Giving a bad rep is IMO rather condescending and if I were to consider it I think it would only be in situations in which I should PM the mods.

I've made up my mind and decided to pick the "Depends on the situation" option since I don't think one should complain after actually starting giving bap rep away.

 

@ Geaer,

I've never posted on another message board, so I'm not familiar with the context of "butt-hurt" you may be used to. In my circle of friends, it refers to allowing yourself to get your feelings hurt over utterly trivial matters - like getting beaten in a video game or teased about something embarrassing one did while drunk. Neg rep - giving and receiving - certainly falls into that category, at least for me. And if it doesn't for you as well, all I'm saying is there's far more important things in life worth one's time, energy and emotional output. Being sensitive at all about the rep system is, in and of itself, being over-sensitive. So is announcing how sensitive you are about it to an entire community.

Again - it's a friggin' D&D message board. If you like the idea of the rep system, you take the good with the bad. Otherwise, you disable it. Hell, maybe people should try to learn something from the negative rep they get. Maybe review the post in question and ask yourself, "Hmm...was I an @sshole just then? Should I reconsider my position and/or turn of phrase if someone found it so distasteful?" Something tells me that happens pretty rarely with those who receive neg rep the most often. Wouldn't that be something.

The last time I allowed myself to get worked up over a neg-rep was when I was called an anti-semite by a knuckle-dragging tea-partier. And after I calmed down, I realized that his opinion meant less to me than the pixels used to display it, and that if he had the brains or balls to rationally counter my argument publicly, he would have. I haven't let it bother me since.

Lastly, I am aware Nog is married. It was a figure of speech. Substitue "get laid" for "you are a male in immediate need of a pleasurable and relaxing experience" if it makes you feel better.

 

You obviously have never been married...

 

Or Gaear could of been married to one of those who can't get enough of him.... and the mailman, the neighbor, the pizza delivery boy...

 

Fair enough, but I'm not sure that you get to be the 'decider' on that for everyone else is all. There are all kinds of different people on boards everywhere. Maybe for some it's their primary source of social interaction, either voluntarily or by reason of disability or something like that. Are they also over-sensitive if they take things seriously? The point is, your own relation to SP or any other message board isn't necessarily the gold standard. Opinions are fine, but you seem to have invoked some supposed higher authority that says "it is as I say," and you just re-iterated it.

I still don't see where NOG announced how sensitive he was about it, at any rate. Again, he mainly asked for opinions and did not preach.

@AtFI and Blades - probably depends on how recent the nuptuals were, sure. (And I swear - I never touched the mailman or the pizza delivery boy!)

 

While I somehow agree with you on the use of derogatory terms, I can't say I blame DR for his reaction. By his own admission in an older thread (and he had absolutely no problem saying this at the time) NOG uses negative rep liberally and will always do so anonymously (to be fair he also does +rep anonymously too). He HAS also used it in the past on otherwise well-written posts that he disagreed with but he still felt he was perfectly justified doing so (and before anyone jumps on this - no, it isn't my posts I'm referring to). Therefore, to start an entire thread (and a poll) dedicated solely to complaining about other people's negative rep of him not being justified is odd, at best.

 

I never said I was the 'decider,' Geaer. Like you said - he asked for opinions. I gave mine. The 99% of SP members who DON'T give you negative rep are far more worth your time than the 1% who do. Or at least they should be. By posting this thread at all, his sensitivity (or hypocrisy, depending on how you want to look at it) was put on full display. So much like his choice to keep the rep system enabled, he should have expected responses here he might not like. If I started a thread every time I received neg rep I didn't think was justified (and from NOG himself, no less), I'd have been banned for spam long ago.

 

I agree completely, Ziad. Sorry, Gaear, but I don't need you explain NOG's post (nor your preaching). He sounded like he was playing the victim to me. Let me go and find my violin.

I guess it was the wrong opinion.

 

Granted, it's a small sample size, but I find it hard to believe that only 7% of people would not retaliatory neg rep someone. If I went in and started liberally dispensing neg rep to everyone on these boards, I'm pretty damn sure I'd get more than 1 in 13 who would neg rep me back... Of course, maybe that would be because I was being a jerk in neg repping them in the first place.

 

I was about to say "I sign all my rep anonymously too" then realised the redundancy of it.

Though am tempted to sign all rep as " - Anon" now for non SPS members

or just "DENIED" perhaps

We should do a poll asking "Do you answer anonymous polls honestly?" that should have an interesting outcome

For the record, I voted it depended on the situation. I can imagine a few scenarios were it would borderline satisfying and amusement depending on the messages exchanged

 

The question is, do you have to be a jerk to give someone a neg rep?

It's a bit smug and all too easy to dish out bad rep points just because you can't come up with a better way of expressing your disagreement or your disapproval.

 

But if someone did NOT tend to answer such polls honestly, would they vote yes or no? Or was that the point you were making?

 

Okay, but

sounds like an order for silence if your conditions can't be met. And

sounds like you're outlining a universal standard that NOG is not abiding by. No "I thinks" or "Maybe you shoulds," just "butt-hurt." All because he asked what people think about negative reps?

In a nutshell, my objection to this type of thinking is that it does not foster debate and discussion. It's the equivalent of shouting down your opponent. You may not like everything NOG says - I get that - but do you really want him to be quiet? This thread's already generated 25+ replies and an engaging debate for a Friday afternoon (depending on where you are) ... seems like a good thing to me.

Anyway, closer to topic: I don't rep much, good or bad, but I probably should since many have been kind enough to +rep me. It just never seemed much of a priority, and I agree that it shouldn't be taken too harshly when/if negatives come in. No big deal.

 

Now, Geaer, I think it's you who's being a little too sensitive. I see what you're saying, but honestly, I think rep is a really dumb thing to get upset over. Sorry if I'm not sufficiently gentle in telling a grown man that he's acting like a little kid. You're right - 25+ people have responded. And I seem to see a general consensus emerging that those who use negative rep - anonymously and regularly, to boot - look pretty silly when questioning the manner in which they receive it back. The "universal standard" I laid out seems to work just fine for everyone else.

It'd be like if you and I were two kids on a playground. You called me a "doody-head," and I decided to be all "tit-for-tat" and call you a "poo-poo face times 10." So you - flabbergasted at my breach of conduct - stand up on the monkey bars and shout "Everyone, can I have your attention please? I just called him a doody-head, but he called me a poo-poo face times 10!! What is everyone's opinion on bringing multiplication into this? Should that be allowed?" If that didn't invite a chorus of laughter and an onslaught of wedgies for you later that day, I don't know what would.

I know you don't like the term, but "butt-hurt" is pretty apt, I have to say. And if you don't like it, you're welcome to neg-rep me for using it again.

 

That would depend on whether the kids have learned their multiplication tables yet.

 

I knew...I KNEW you were going to chime in with something like that. Butthole.

How's it hangin' Splunge? Shoot me a PM to say howdy once in a while.

 

Well, I think we've both had our say, so last-word goes to you. And no I won't neg-rep you. [sneaks off to post one anonymously]