Explanation of new points?
+s are worth 1, the original comment itself is worth 1. I also think there is a lag in adjusting the point totals of the poster you're voting on. I wouldn't think much of it past voting + for good, - for bad and allowing it to work itself out.
Edit: I think the original post is worth 1, but it doesn't show on the little counters.
I see no +'s or -'s at all. Maybe I don't have enough MGoPoints to rate others??
Thanks for the info... and thanks for the opportunity to pad my points :)
We don't even see the + or - until we get 20 or more points?
Just wanted to make sure it wasn't a browser thing. (Safari on a Mac)
I was qualified to give or dock points for about five minutes!! Then... I lost it. I guess I posted something people hate because I lost points! Aaarrrrrggg.... the humanity!!
That clears things up for me.
I don't see them either... maybe I'm blind?
the text of each comment. it's hard to see b/c it looks like a watermark on paper. --------->
Oh my God, it even has a watermark
but it doesnt matter cause i love them now people like the barking spchinter cant get points when they post stupidly
It makes me afraid to post for fear of getting negative points...but I can give my still +1 for everything.
Man, I almost never posted because fear of looking like an idiot was enough to dissuade me. Now that I have to fear looking like an idiot AND losing points I'll never post.
EDIT: See? The guy above me basically posted the exact same thing. Now I look like an idiot.
Looks like everyone feels bad for you and is giving you + points. Don't be afraid, we're mostly nice around here.
WHy does this response have -3 points (right now)? This is a problem with the rating points - no accountability or criteria. Looking over the board right now, there seems to be multiple posts that have negative points without any indication in the content as to why or anyone giving a reason for giving a negative point.
All of these points systems are making this board less and less appealing. For example, I have over 100 points for posting, though that gives me no added credibility. And this post will likely get minus points - not for me saying anything false or inflammatory - simply for stating my opinion.
Thus, there is no accountability or criteria for the negative or positive point system, and idiots can accrue just as many posting points as smart dudes can, making them meaningless.
Lose the points!
EDIT: The above post I referred to now has +3 points - going from -3 to +3 within minutes, when nothing changed except my reply - further evidence of how meaningless the points are
There's a post up front now; please bear with me here. Upvotes are worth 2, down -1. And blueblueblue, I think you'll find that people are probably going to reward you for posting a substantive criticism instead of knock you down.
Yes, it all does make more sense now (I also didn't see, before posting my complaints, the diary entry on the topic). I especially like the idea of negative points coming at a cost to the donor - this provides some of the accountability I desire.
For points? Like a free trip to Hamtramck or something?
5 points gets you a Stanley nickel.