Antipoints

[Therealmaster]

Would it be possible to see WHO is giving you antipoints? at least that way you know who it is and maybe you can figure out why they've given them you.

[pwaring]

That's probably a good idea, especially if they give you negative AntiPoints.

Oh, and your signiature should read /dev/null not dev/null

[Therealmaster]

Originally posted by pwaring
That's probably a good idea, especially if they give you negative AntiPoints.

Exactly what i mean, either we should be allowed to see who gave it us, or at least they should leave a comment.

Originally posted by pwaring
Oh, and your signiature should read /dev/null not dev/null

and i know that the *nix address is /dev/null .... but i wanted dev/null (just to confuse everyone even more)

[ThePreacher]

I got negative antipoints for this comment and the thing is the person who gave them to me said "for sure, for sure" as though they agreed with me. This antipoints thing is annoying. At least Im not as hated as that Seb-g.

[Ennis]

First of all if you knew who gave you antipoint's nobody would give them for fear of revenge antipoints.
It's pretty obvious people, as for Seb-G, he's is just a child making fun for everyone. He's hated but man doe's he not care or ever will! And you are not hated because you get antipoints, you maybe just too opionated for some and Im writing this with a hangover so Im gonna stop but you get the jist.

[Alcatraz]

How many antipoints do newbies start out with?

[stflook]

Originally posted by Therealmaster
Would it be possible to see WHO is giving you antipoints? at least that way you know who it is and maybe you can figure out why they've given them you.

Letting people know who is giving you AntiPoints would leave the door open for AntiPoint retaliation, and even flame or AntiPoint wars. If people want you to know who is sending them, they will sign the submission. If not, such anonymity is their right. You can generally tell why you're given the points based on whether or not there is a comment, what kind of comment it is, how many points the submission was worth, and what type of post it was. I believe I can tell with fairly good reliability when somebody truly doesn't approve of my post, and when they're just abusing the system. There is no need to have the person's name given.

[UberC0der]

I can understand wanting to know why someone gave you negative points. Perhaps an alternative to user disclosure would be a mandatory comment when giving negative points. At least that way you could get an idea about Why they gave them to you. I know that I would want to know.

[Evil Homer]

Not to complain, but isn't this like the 2394879836th thread with just about these exact same posts? It has been made clear many times in the past that a change in the antipoint system is very unlikely, so you should just probably just get used to it

[Therealmaster]

Originally posted by stflook


Letting people know who is giving you AntiPoints would leave the door open for AntiPoint retaliation, and even flame or AntiPoint wars.

This I actually thought about...and then thought that as the antipoints wont let you asign people antipoints one after the other that this wouldn't be quite so important. This is i guess just another example where a decent feature is wrecked because a few would abuse it.

Originally posted by stflook

If people want you to know who is sending them, they will sign the submission. If not, such anonymity is their right. You can generally tell why you're given the points based on whether or not there is a comment, what kind of comment it is, how many points the submission was worth, and what type of post it was. I believe I can tell with fairly good reliability when somebody truly doesn't approve of my post, and when they're just abusing the system. There is no need to have the person's name given.

True it can be easy to work out why a whole batch of antipoints has been give, but even if people choose to remain anonymous shouldn't there be at least ( as UberC0der said) a mandatory comment when giving someone antipoints.
And if someone is abusing the system then if the name is given then it would be easy to tell who it is, and if not (or they have to comment) then it would make no difference to the current set up.