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.
It's true that the current system won't let you give the same person points over and over before giving them to others. The end result? Lots of other people caught in the middle getting points, good or bad, that they don't deserve. We can avoid that can of worms altogether simply by not providing the sender's name. If you want to have it send the name as a default and leave a checkbox or something to submit anonymous points, that would be fine. I know that doesn't solve the problem in question, but I think it would be a good middle ground. You should ask JP about an alternative way to track AntiPoints abusers. I'm sure he can come up with something, assuming he agrees.



shouldn't there be at least ( as UberC0der said) a mandatory comment when giving someone antipoints.
A mandatory comment as WHO said?? I posted a thread about that exact topic a while ago, and JP shot it down. I'm not about to retype my whole argument on the issue, but here's the link if you want to check it out.

http://www.antionline.com/showthread...hreadid=119593