Allow reputation points to be given for a longer period of time [poll added]

[beowulf7]

Sometimes when I try to give some reputation points to someone, I am denied in this ability since the system tells me the post is too old. I think that part should be disabled. For example, what if I searched for an older thread and someone said something useful that benefitted me? I should be able to "rep" him/her, regardless of age.

Also, I tend to give thread starters of hot deals reputation points after I receive the product and whatever rebate(s) were promised. Often, that occurs "too long" after whatever timer SlickDeals has for rep. pts.

Therefore, please disable the aging/timer function of rep. pts., or at least lengthen it to 3-12 months. Thanks.

Edit: I added a poll. Please vote if you have an opinion. Thanks.

[kel_be]

Therefore, please disable the aging/timer function of rep. pts., or at least lengthen it to 3-12 months. Thanks.
The restriction was put in place because too many people abused rep points, and swapped then back & forth.

[benjie]

Sometimes when I try to give some reputation points to someone, I am denied in this ability since the system tells me the post is too old. I think that part should be disabled. For example, what if I searched for an older thread and someone said something useful that benefitted me? I should be able to "rep" him/her, regardless of age.

Also, I tend to give thread starters of hot deals reputation points after I receive the product and whatever rebate(s) were promised. Often, that occurs "too long" after whatever timer SlickDeals has for rep. pts.

Therefore, please disable the aging/timer function of rep. pts., or at least lengthen it to 3-12 months. Thanks.
:iagree:
I've never been able to figure out why this limit is in place. You're sure not gonna keep people from trading reps, or any other scenario I can think of, simply by putting age restrictions on it.

[beowulf7]

The restriction was put in place because too many people abused rep points, and swapped then back & forth.
I understand that concern, but I don't see how the time limit is a factor. For example, someone can still trade RPs with each other if it's relatively immediate (< 1 month?). IMO, it's a silly restriction that doesn't really serve any purpose, despite its good intention.

[arjunsr]

I understand that concern, but I don't see how the time limit is a factor. For example, someone can still trade RPs with each other if it's relatively immediate (< 1 month?). IMO, it's a silly restriction that doesn't really serve any purpose, despite its good intention.
its for people seaching through reppable forums to find a post months old to get a post they can rep.

if you search, there was a long thread where this was discussed.

[beowulf7]

its for people seaching through reppable forums to find a post months old to get a post they can rep.

if you search, there was a long thread where this was discussed.
OK, I'm still not sure I understand, but I'll look for that other thread when I get a chance.

[hailToPitt]

yah, I think that it should be taken away. I also wait for about a couple of months for freebies to be delivered and then rep. Usually it isn't a problem though because they post another freebie and I just rep them for the freebie I have already gotten

[The~Ble..ep~]

As lilpele mentioned above, you can just look for thier new post, and rep them there. Just put a note that its for this item you got last year...so and so...


Man..thats a lot of thinking for a 16 year old.. :lol:

[beowulf7]

yah, I think that it should be taken away. I also wait for about a couple of months for freebies to be delivered and then rep. Usually it isn't a problem though because they post another freebie and I just rep them for the freebie I have already gotten
I've done that before a couple times, where I want to rep someone, but I can't, so I look for his/her more recent "reppable" posts and do it there and mention it's for another thread. But the problem with that is I'd like the RP to me accurate, meaning the post and the person, not just the person.

Anyway, I still don't understand the valid reason for SD to put a timer on repping someone. They're punishing 90+% of the honest folks for something < 10% might have "abused". It's like banning sports cars b/c some people (e.g. bankrobbers) might misuse it.

[kel_be]

Anyway, I still don't understand the valid reason for SD to put a timer on repping someone. They're punishing 90+% of the honest folks for something < 10% might have "abused". It's like banning sports cars b/c some people (e.g. bankrobbers) might misuse it.
I think your association is slightly off, but I don't think this "change" will happen. There were a lot of people who traded posts with others. And so that "privilege" was revoked, and a time limit was put in place. Similar to the negative reputation privilege...

[beowulf7]

I think your association is slightly off, but I don't think this "change" will happen. There were a lot of people who traded posts with others. And so that "privilege" was revoked, and a time limit was put in place. Similar to the negative reputation privilege...
OK, thanks for replying. I still don't understand how or why people can't trade RPs with each other the way it currently exists (albeit within a time limit). In other words, there still exists the possibility of RP abuse. :confused:

[ASG]

This all still reminds me of when I used to play games on Yahoo. Everybody cared so much about their ranking when in reality it does nothing for you.

[hailToPitt]

This all still reminds me of when I used to play games on Yahoo. Everybody cared so much about their ranking when in reality it does nothing for you.

not true, ranking helped you match up with better people. When I was good at chess and was almost at the red ranking, I wouldn't play with people that are like green, or blue, I might if they challenged me, but other then that...

[Eyesparkle]

It does seem like a rather indirect solution. What stops me (besides my own morals) from sending a PM that says "hey, go throw a thank you out in freebies so I can give you a rep?"... or from people making a post once a month to get around this preventative measure?

The time limit for posts being merged and then being able to rep the OP should match..they don't seem like they do... but I may be missing something as a newer user.

Beowulf, you may want to add a poll to this thread to get an idea of what others think. Curious if it is only the mods who would support the rule.

(No offense mods, you know we love you :worthy: )

[kel_be]

We don't mind the suggestions. If we did, we wouldn't have this forums. I'm just voicing the reasons as of right now.

[beowulf7]

It does seem like a rather indirect solution. What stops me (besides my own morals) from sending a PM that says "hey, go throw a thank you out in freebies so I can give you a rep?"... or from people making a post once a month to get around this preventative measure?

The time limit for posts being merged and then being able to rep the OP should match..they don't seem like they do... but I may be missing something as a newer user.

Beowulf, you may want to add a poll to this thread to get an idea of what others think. Curious if it is only the mods who would support the rule.

(No offense mods, you know we love you :worthy: )
Good idea, but I bet even if we all voted to remove the time expiration of repping someone, I don't think the admin/slickdeal would listen to us. They have the time expiration for a reason, although I still don't understand exactly why.

[cogentman]

Good idea, but I bet even if we all voted to remove the time expiration of repping someone, I don't think the admin/slickdeal would listen to us. They have the time expiration for a reason, although I still don't understand exactly why.

The poll would be to gather opinions, not to force a change. The mods do listen, but listening does not equate to acquiescing to the poll results. They are looking at the big picture and if they feel that the 30 day limit cuts down on the rep swapping, they will leave the limit in place. I'm sure they would rather spend what time they have looking after other issues.

Like you and others have mentioned, it's still possible to rep an op when you want to, it's just a little more trouble, which I think is the point.

[bobbyfk]

Sometimes when I try to give some reputation points to someone, I am denied in this ability since the system tells me the post is too old. I think that part should be disabled. For example, what if I searched for an older thread and someone said something useful that benefitted me? I should be able to "rep" him/her, regardless of age.

Also, I tend to give thread starters of hot deals reputation points after I receive the product and whatever rebate(s) were promised. Often, that occurs "too long" after whatever timer SlickDeals has for rep. pts.

Therefore, please disable the aging/timer function of rep. pts., or at least lengthen it to 3-12 months. Thanks.
:iagree:

[beowulf7]

I can't seem to add a poll now that this thread has already been started. :confused:

[SweetestChana]

It does seem like a rather indirect solution. What stops me (besides my own morals) from sending a PM that says "hey, go throw a thank you out in freebies so I can give you a rep?"... or from people making a post once a month to get around this preventative measure?

The time limit for posts being merged and then being able to rep the OP should match..they don't seem like they do... but I may be missing something as a newer user.

Beowulf, you may want to add a poll to this thread to get an idea of what others think. Curious if it is only the mods who would support the rule.

(No offense mods, you know we love you :worthy: )

I also agree. I would like to rep the original poster, but if I have to do it later because the post is to old, I might forget. I really don't care about reps that much, but it is a good way to show people they are appreciated.

[acesmuzic]

i've had this problem multiple times in the past few days....sometimes i do take the time to search for a more recent post to rep, but other times that's just too much work and i end up just sending a pm to say thanks.

[XXnarg]

I can't seem to add a poll now that this thread has already been started. :confused:Adding a poll after thread creation is not under Edit, it's under "Thread Tools" at the top right, can you do it there?

[beowulf7]

Adding a poll after thread creation is not under Edit, it's under "Thread Tools" at the top right, can you do it there?
Thanks for the info. I just added a poll. :cool:

[widgit]

Thanks for the info. I just added a poll. :cool:

Nice work on the poll, beowulf7 :). Just a thought, though, but maybe it should have had a third option, something like: 'It's ok to put a time limit on reps, but make it 2-3 months instead of one month'. (don't know if you can even edit polls once they're up, though.)

My reasoning is this:
Mr SD wants to limit the time for being able to rep someone due to the abuse that was going on, which is perfectly understandable and is his right. Some users want to have a little more time for their freebies, etc., to arrive first before repping someone, which is also their right. (I usually rep right away, myself, but I understand that a lot of others prefer to wait :))

So how about a compromise bewteen the two? Still have a time limit, but expand that time another month or two? Even just one extra month would give those that prefer to wait a little more time to get their goodies in so that they can rep the OP, and it would also still keep a pretty decent check on repping abuse.

Just my $.02 :)

[beowulf7]

Nice work on the poll, beowulf7 :). Just a thought, though, but maybe it should have had a third option, something like: 'It's ok to put a time limit on reps, but make it 2-3 months instead of one month'. (don't know if you can even edit polls once they're up, though.)

My reasoning is this:
Mr SD wants to limit the time for being able to rep someone due to the abuse that was going on, which is perfectly understandable and is his right. Some users want to have a little more time for their freebies, etc., to arrive first before repping someone, which is also their right. (I usually rep right away, myself, but I understand that a lot of others prefer to wait :))

So how about a compromise bewteen the two? Still have a time limit, but expand that time another month or two? Even just one extra month would give those that prefer to wait a little more time to get their goodies in so that they can rep the OP, and it would also still keep a pretty decent check on repping abuse.

Just my $.02 :)
That's a good point; I forgot about that 3rd option. I tried to look for "edit poll" in the Thread Tools, but it's not there. So the voters will have to make 1 of 2 choices: 1.) keep the same small time limit or 2.) abolish it altogether!

[bean]

mods can edit polls, also this thread is pretty much a waste of time unless the mods want to compromise, which is doubtful.

[beowulf7]

mods can edit polls, also this thread is pretty much a waste of time unless the mods want to compromise, which is doubtful.
Well, even if nothing comes out of it, at least the mods and Mr. SD himself know what the popular voice wants. So I don't think it's a waste of time.

[callpocket]

Sometimes when I try to give some reputation points to someone, I am denied in this ability since the system tells me the post is too old. I think that part should be disabled. For example, what if I searched for an older thread and someone said something useful that benefitted me? I should be able to "rep" him/her, regardless of age.

Also, I tend to give thread starters of hot deals reputation points after I receive the product and whatever rebate(s) were promised. Often, that occurs "too long" after whatever timer SlickDeals has for rep. pts.

Therefore, please disable the aging/timer function of rep. pts., or at least lengthen it to 3-12 months. Thanks.

Edit: I added a poll. Please vote if you have an opinion. Thanks.

I'm a little confused myself about how the time limit stops the abuse. If people want to trade reps, they will find a way.

The problem I find with the time limit is this: I wait until something happens before I go back to rep, the thread is too old, I look for another "repable" post from the Op and can't find one. So the OP gets no rep, just a PM from me to give thanks, because he didn't post anywhere else where he could get a rep.

And still people are abusing the rep system. A month time limit on repping a thread doesn't stop that from happening.

[beowulf7]

I'm a little confused myself about how the time limit stops the abuse. If people want to trade reps, they will find a way.

The problem I find with the time limit is this: I wait until something happens before I go back to rep, the thread is too old, I look for another "repable" post from the Op and can't find one. So the OP gets no rep, just a PM from me to give thanks, because he didn't post anywhere else where he could get a rep.

And still people are abusing the rep system. A month time limit on repping a thread doesn't stop that from happening.
Exactly! My point precisely.

SD is in effect punishing good/honest people while the abusers will still find a way to subvert the system.

[big1]

Also, I tend to give thread starters of hot deals reputation points after I receive the product and whatever rebate(s) were promised. Often, that occurs "too long" after whatever timer SlickDeals has for rep. pts.

does the fact that you didnt get a rebate make the deal less rep worthy? it isnt the posters fault you didnt get a rebate.
I give out rep when i buy an item, as i think it was a hot enough deal to actually follow through with the purchase, then the poster deserves the rep.

i didnt vote as i dont see a problem with the current system. i see a problem with the way you give rep points.

[beowulf7]

does the fact that you didnt get a rebate make the deal less rep worthy? it isnt the posters fault you didnt get a rebate.
I give out rep when i buy an item, as i think it was a hot enough deal to actually follow through with the purchase, then the poster deserves the rep.

i didnt vote as i dont see a problem with the current system. i see a problem with the way you give rep points.
Well, we have two different perspectives and we disagree, which is fine. I rep and thumb after the deal has been delivered. It doesn't mean your way is better than mine or vice versa. However, if rep. pts. were not time limited, then both of us could eventually reward the post.

[implode]

I wish I could get repped for older posts...my hershy cap thread is churning out winners still. Yet I'm lucky to get repped for 10% of the wins. Reps make my large amount of posts look a lot less like spam :P