AP assignment control please

[LarrySmith]

You do have a point DeadAddict. I don't have an issue with someone who has a lot of greens after 574 posts...sheesh you EARNED it by posting that much. As a matter of fact i don't have an issue with someone who has 11 green lights after 2 months either. Some people love the boost..they probally log on just to see if they have more greens....they probally anticipate making the "top ten antipoint earner" list also. My point is don't try to change the system when you have used said system to achieve your desired status. I would rather be a good Network Admin than have 11 green lights with a "SR" status label. I use the site to learn things. Perhaps I am guilty of not contributing enough. I actually don't have the time at this point in life...and I don't believe that I even have anything original to contribute anyway.
At least in the way of security. Anything I post could probally be articulated better by someone else. IMHO we should just leave the system as is. If you want to balance out a post that's been hit unjustly just consider your extra weight in greenies a reward for the poor slob that got negged. I wan't talking about a good post getting greens. However some of the post I've seen with massive greens are one line posts such as" I agree" or "I like that also"
Situations like those are clear cases of a antipoint cabal or alliance at work.
But I don't really care..it's no biggie to me. As long as AO has good security info I'll be around......lurking

[skiddieleet]

Although LarrySmith has a point, I still think there should be something to put limits on the number you assign. I propose that on the window that pops up for assigning antipoints they have choices like this:
I strongly approve
I approve
I slightly approve
I slightly disapprove
I disapprove
I strongly disapprove
All of those being different amounts of antipoints being assigned. I know that this will most likely never be implemented which is ok, I have very few complaints about the system as it is. My points count very little whereas others with more points to give count more. Therefore, I don't really have to worry about hitting anyone too hard.
I think my proposed method would give a clear method for implementing antipoint assignments. For example, you would probably only assign the I strongly approve choice for a really good tutorial, where you might use the slightly approve for the good one line post. And just do the equal and opposite for negs. I'm probably crazy for posting this but I feel that my method might work if implemented properly. Plus this way would sort of keep the old method just with different levels. Comments are appreciated, flames are tolerated.

[nebulus200]

Thank you H3retic for getting the thread back on topic. AP alliances, people with points who don't deserve them, etc are all outside of the point of my original post. The whole point of my original post is simply this, there have been many times where a good answer has been given; however, I chose not to give the poster AP's simply because I knew roughly how many they would get for it and I felt it wasn't deserving of that kind of a tilt (taking the post from even to extremely positive for just one 'i approve'). Conversely, there have been times where I didn't feel that the post was helpful, or that it was abusive, or that it was flat wrong, and have held off assigning negative AP's for the same reason, the poster didn't deserve to have their post go from even to extremely negative.

I am not asking to be able to assign exact AP's, I am only asking that I be given more options that just 'I approve' or 'I disapprove', and I strongly agree with h3retic's categories. I for one would certainly be more likely to assign AP's to a post, given that extra degree of control, and I would suspect so would other senior members.

/nebulus