OMG, I got a negative vote! What for?


Recommended Posts

I think it's a good idea for staff to have but I don't think MVC's should have it. I've seen them derail threads and make snide comments before I don't think they should all get the ability to down vote. Some MVC's like Rappy who deserve the MVC badge should be allowed while others (which I won't name) clearly do not deserve the badge or this negative vote ability.

I think it's a good idea for staff to have but I don't think MVC's should have it. I've seen them derail threads and make snide comments before I don't think they should all get the ability to down vote. Some MVC's like Rappy who deserve the MVC badge should be allowed while others (which I won't name) clearly do not deserve the badge or this negative vote ability.

I agree with that.

I think it's a good idea for staff to have but I don't think MVC's should have it. I've seen them derail threads and make snide comments before I don't think they should all get the ability to down vote. Some MVC's like Rappy who deserve the MVC badge should be allowed while others (which I won't name) clearly do not deserve the badge or this negative vote ability.

This is true. I hope they change it to mods only.

I understand perfectly how the system works.

  • I post something at MVC "Alpha"'s thread on something's he's expert about
  • "Alpha" doesn't like what I type
  • "Alpha" doesn't like that I disagree with him, votes me down
  • I recruit brentaal to upboat me
  • ??????
  • Profit!

It's one thing to be 'wrong' or to disagree with someone: I do that all the time and I don't think anybody would mod down for that. It's another thing to be deliberately deceptive, flame-baity, etc.
If I were going to down-vote it'd be for something like:
  • User makes a thread in Linux forums "Hey Guys, how can I install photoshop?"
  • I say 'photoshop isn't a linux application, give gimp a shot'
  • Someone else says 'above poster is wrong, photoshop can be made to work with WINE'
  • Some other guy shows up with 'Linux sucks, stop being a communist and just use windows' vote down
  • Someone else says 'for simple stuff a virtual machine might be a good choice too'

Already spotted a flaw in our system.. when a staffer votes down it doesn't stop someone cancelling the vote by applying a positive vote, will make this a priority to block + votes when a - vote has been applied.

I sort of like that there's a self-correcting mechanism in place. Maybe make a down-vote count as -3 or -5 but still allow up votes so if say 2 staff say "-10" it could be cancelled if many people disagree with that decision. I believe the karma system was intended to reflect the community's opinion of the member. Warning reflects the moderators' opinion of the member (negative) and MVC/Staff positions reflect the opinion of MVC & staff members (positive).

  • Like 3

can you hide the negative button? I dont see the point of it being viewable if I cant use it.

I suspect positives will be used by people more now if its meant to be a measure of 'karma'. I cant help but think karma is a little futile unless you intend to use it for something, would the staff care to elabore on the future uses for this yardstick?

  • Like 1
  • You complained in the thread that someone negatively voted you, in this instance I will join in the vote process too.

:rofl: That part amused me greatly!

Nice addition, and I hope that upper staff (Admins and maybe Supers) have a means to check for abuse of this feature to avoid perception/accusation that a staffer or MVC is abusing the feature. (Y)

It feels like it adds a negative aspect to the posting environment here. Just seeing the negative sign alone does it. Can't you guys manually remove rep from naughty people after you discuss it in the secret forums?

That would be too many people to deal with. Unless they report it.

I sort of like that there's a self-correcting mechanism in place. Maybe make a down-vote count as -3 or -5 but still allow up votes so if say 2 staff say "-10" it could be cancelled if many people disagree with that decision. I believe the karma system was intended to reflect the community's opinion of the member. Warning reflects the moderators' opinion of the member (negative) and MVC/Staff positions reflect the opinion of MVC & staff members (positive).

I like that idea. Maybe give weights to different negative votes. MVC can do a -1, Forum Mods -2, GMods -3, Supers -5, Admins -10, Coder/Dev -9999999 :ninja:

If there's some troll post that has five reputation points, and a moderator or MVC chooses to negative rep it, does the rep just go down to 4? It won't be effective if that's the case, and you do sometimes see trolling posts that have some positive rep.

meh, I think it's useless.

You could always take off 20 rep points (or even more, depending on the offense) for every warning a member gets. That would be far more efficient, and doesn't a negative environment to the forums.

but what would all this rep do anyway? Unless you visit their profile you wont know about their rep. I'm the sort of guy that would gain alot of rep then lose it all in one day as im in a dodgy mood. Unless the rep is showing on the avatar or at least on view it wont matter

but what would all this rep do anyway? Unless you visit their profile you wont know about their rep. I'm the sort of guy that would gain alot of rep then lose it all in one day as im in a dodgy mood. Unless the rep is showing on the avatar or at least on view it wont matter

and you think that -1 on someone's post would seriously affect how new members perceive him/her?

So it really is related to profile visiting.

meh, I think it's useless.

You could always take off 20 rep points (or even more, depending on the offense) for every warning a member gets. That would be far more efficient, and doesn't a negative environment to the forums.

Thats an idea worthy of merit. Keeps the karma system benign and useless as well as balancing out warnings vs karma.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!