81 replies to this topic

[The Shark]

I have noticed as of late, that two of our forums resident toddlers - Quantumofsolace007 and Mr. Zuckovsky (formerly Bryan Herbert) having being thumbing down my posts, but apart from that, I don't have many problems with this system.

I didn't think that you could see who negative pointed or positive pointed you?!

Just a bit of deductive reasoning.

[Skudor]

Thanks for pointing out this system - hadn't noticed it before. Seems a bit pointless, and you run out of negatives too quickly anyway

[Captain Tightpants]

Congratulations to Qunatumofsolace007 for breaking the forum record for worst reputation: he's now at -85.

Thanks for pointing out this system - hadn't noticed it before. Seems a bit pointless, and you run out of negatives too quickly anyway

It's to stop you from ganging up on someone. If I had a mind to, I could go through all your posts and knock reputation off them.

[Skudor]

Congratulations to Qunatumofsolace007 for breaking the forum record for worst reputation: he's now at -85.

Thanks for pointing out this system - hadn't noticed it before. Seems a bit pointless, and you run out of negatives too quickly anyway

It's to stop you from ganging up on someone. If I had a mind to, I could go through all your posts and knock reputation off them.

I was being ironic buddy. Which just goes to show how pointless the whole thing is. There are lots of personal issues on here, feuds and what have you that make a system like this quite meaningless. Maybe its being used correctly, I don´t know.

PS - just to restore some balance in the world I gave you a lovely plus for your post.

[coco1997]

Congratulations to Qunatumofsolace007 for breaking the forum record for worst reputation: he's now at -85.

That may be the present record, but I know for a fact that BryanHerbert "The Pervert" AKA 'Mr.Zukovsky' shamefully bore a -88 before being banned.

[Righty007]

Congratulations to Qunatumofsolace007 for breaking the forum record for worst reputation: he's now at -85.

That may be the present record, but I know for a fact that BryanHerbert "The Pervert" AKA 'Mr.Zukovsky' shamefully bore a -88 before being banned.

BREAKING NEWS: Quantumofsolace007 has just beat Bryan Pervert's old record!

[Jim]

OK, OK. Curious though those two members may be, although I don't see much harm in QoS007 that not getting quite so excited at every passing moment and taking care over the spelling and grammar of such excitement wouldn't solve, the last couple of posts here do look a bit off.

Having the technical knowledge of a dead brick, I don't know how this is turned off or whether it can be only set to acknowledge positives, which would be nice, and as is acknowledged it's impossible to work out who is using / abusing. However, revelry in others' scores reported here is quite easy to spot - and lacks panache. Cease.

Noting for the first time I apparently have a score of 59 (out of what?) which does my reputation no good at all.

[SecretAgentFan]

What is repuation?

[Skudor]

What is repuation?

It's the little plus and minus in the bottom right corner of each post - which get added up and displayed on your profile.

[Zorin Industries]

QOS007 is over enthusiastic but that is all. Though I did catch some comments of his on the "other site" and he is certainly not listening to the "calm down brigade" at all and does - annoyingly - think every rumour is true already to a recent extent that sees a thought os his that cites Rachel Weisz is still going to be the head of Quantum in an Israel set Bond film because Rachel Weisz must be Jewish (!!!!) and I "love that rumour so it must be true" (paraphrased).

You cannot argue with that sort of resolute blinkered behaviour so trying seems futile. But don't make it personal.

[Quantumofsolace007]

QOS007 is over enthusiastic but that is all. Though I did catch some comments of his on the "other site" and he is certainly not listening to the "calm down brigade" at all and does - annoyingly - think every rumour is true already to a recent extent that sees a thought os his that cites Rachel Weisz is still going to be the head of Quantum in an Israel set Bond film because Rachel Weisz must be Jewish (!!!!) and I "love that rumour so it must be true" (paraphrased).

You cannot argue with that sort of resolute blinkered behaviour so trying seems futile. But don't make it personal.

I'm more enthustistic on the other site as there is no reputation thing there.


Bond 23 is not and will not be filming in Israel Rachel Weisz is not cast as anything nor will she be.


And the only thing that is true is offical press releases from EON productions. Not even "insider information" given to this site is true. Only Press releases. Period end of dscussion anything else is subject to debate.

Now what do I want to be true is another story. I want bond to film in Israel because it is a gorgous setting.
Though I can think of a dozen locations I want more. For example New York City which was the earliest Bond 23 rumor is definitly a location I want... but i know i have a better chance of seducing Emma Watson then of seeing 007 in New York.

I'll go one further Bond 23 is not filming in the United States and probably won't film in north america (unless canada's mountains wind up being used as another local)

As for Weisz she isn't in my top 20 of bond girls and with her rumored for Dark knight rises I think any hope of even an ounce of that rumor/hoax/story being true is shot to hell.

Also anything reported conjectured or discusses pre April 2010 is false wrong outdated and not true except for Mendes whom I'm hoping will direct the film but even that could fall through.


How is that for realism I also believe every word in this post.


ok why did this get a negative post seriously?

[stromberg]

And the only thing that is true is offical press releases from EON productions. Not even "insider information" given to this site is true. Only Press releases. Period end of dscussion anything else is subject to debate.

True, yes.

"Once the reputation's shot, you get away with quite a lot!"
(German saying, translation courtesy of Harry Rowohlt)

Seriously, why all the fuss about the reputation system? You're only inviting people to give you a negative rating and sit and watch you freak out again (okay, maybe "freak out" is a bit strong). Things like that happen on every schoolyard around the world every day. Get over it and just ignore the damn thing.

[Goodnight]

How come there is limit to the number of positive votes you can make in a day?

[Vauxhall]

I was unaware of this reputation system until this moment and it was a simpler time, although perhaps it is more indicative of my lack of attentiveness to these boards in recent times. I shall endeavour to remedy this all accordingly.

[Mr.Zukovsky]

You guys are a bunch of punks, making fun of someone's last name, real clever. I'M NOT BRYAN HERBERT, what is wrong with you people, are you hearing impaired? Where are your facts that have lead you to believe I'm him? Oh because MHarkin says I am? Oh That must make it true then.

[Righty007]

You guys are a bunch of punks, making fun of someone's last name, real clever. I'M NOT BRYAN HERBERT, what is wrong with you people, are you hearing impaired? Where are your facts that have lead you to believe I'm him? Oh because MHarkin says I am? Oh That must make it true then.

Considering one cannot hear posts, it's virtually impossible for you to come to the conclusion that I'm "hearing impaired." Illiterate maybe but not hearing impaired. You most definitely are Bryan Herbert or else you wouldn't be getting upset when we call you Bryan Pervert, the most apt description for that troll aka you.

You're like a cockroach. You're everywhere and you won't leave until you're squashed.

[Chief of SIS]

Oh silly Bryan. I haven't been here that long and I even know it's you.

[Mr.Zukovsky]

Excuse me? I'm the troll here? Um not from where I stand. Don't talk to me like your some superior king. Is this really your welcoming committee to your website? This is absolutely pathetic. You need to have some respect for people, at your age it is quite sad you havent mastered that yet.

[DamnCoffee]

Well, I think you would've had a warmer reception if you were actually a new member, and not a previously banned one.

[Mr.Zukovsky]

I have never been banned from this site, and i will say again: I'm not Bryan Herbert. If you don't believe me, i don't care. That's your prerogative.

[The Shark]

I can never understand the point of being able to rate people's profile, it's a pointless feature which doesn't seem to serve any real purpose. I have seen positive comments in discussions where a user has disagreed with them and that positive comment has a thumbs down. Why do you need to give someone's comment a negative rating when you can just agree with them in a comment??? It has happen to me on several occasions, I am not even doing anything wrong. It makes good people look bad.

Do you see what i mean?

You guys are a bunch of punks, making fun of someone's last name, real clever. I'M NOT BRYAN HERBERT, what is wrong with you people, are you hearing impaired? Where are your facts that have lead you to believe I'm him? Oh because MHarkin says I am? Oh That must make it true then.

Excuse me? I'm the troll here? Um not from where I stand. Don't talk to me like your some superior king. Is this really your welcoming committee to your website? This is absolutely pathetic. You need to have some respect for people, at your age it is quite sad you havent mastered that yet.

I have never been banned from this site, and i will say again: I'm not Bryan Herbert. If you don't believe me, i don't care. That's your prerogative.

"The lady doth protest too much."

Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 222–230

- Bill Shakespeare.

[Santa]

I'm more enthustistic on the other site as there is no reputation thing there.


Bond 23 is not and will not be filming in Israel Rachel Weisz is not cast as anything nor will she be.


And the only thing that is true is offical press releases from EON productions. Not even "insider information" given to this site is true. Only Press releases. Period end of dscussion anything else is subject to debate.

Now what do I want to be true is another story. I want bond to film in Israel because it is a gorgous setting.
Though I can think of a dozen locations I want more. For example New York City which was the earliest Bond 23 rumor is definitly a location I want... but i know i have a better chance of seducing Emma Watson then of seeing 007 in New York.

I'll go one further Bond 23 is not filming in the United States and probably won't film in north america (unless canada's mountains wind up being used as another local)

As for Weisz she isn't in my top 20 of bond girls and with her rumored for Dark knight rises I think any hope of even an ounce of that rumor/hoax/story being true is shot to hell.

Also anything reported conjectured or discusses pre April 2010 is false wrong outdated and not true except for Mendes whom I'm hoping will direct the film but even that could fall through.


How is that for realism I also believe every word in this post.


ok why did this get a negative post seriously?

For poor spelling, grammar and punctuation, I would think.

Excuse me? I'm the troll here? Um not from where I stand. Don't talk to me like your some superior king. Is this really your welcoming committee to your website? This is absolutely pathetic. You need to have some respect for people, at your age it is quite sad you havent mastered that yet.

Having not paid much any attention to the whole Zukovsky/Bryan saga I didn't really know what they were on about, until that post... Pure Bryan! I nearly said "welcome back, Bry, we've missed you!", but it wouldn't be true.


Seriously, though, isn't this all getting a bit childish? There's a rating system, some people will like what one says, some won't. In the end we're (mostly) all a bunch of faceless Bond geeks hiding behind user names, so what we think doesn't really matter and there's no need to take it to heart.

P.S. Having moaned about someone else's poor spelling I need to exuse myself by pointing out that I'm having some issues with my keyboard and you may find letters missing in some of my posts - c or g in particular, such as "you're all a bunch of unts". It's not me, I'm perfect. It's my equipment.

[Captain Tightpants]

Quantumofsolace007 now has -101 reputation!

Though I have to admit, I might have helped him a little bit. He just seemed so excited about the posibility of getting a -100 score, and who am I to deny him of such joy, particularly after we've crosed swords* so often in the past? Congrats, buddy - you've earned it!

... Although, I'm not sure I should be celebrating. With a score of -101, my first repsonse is to scold. Bad Quantumofsolace007! Bad!







*Though to be fair, it's not so much us crossing swords as it is me wielding a sword as he defends himself with a cardboard tube.

[Chief of SIS]

Seriously, an impartial mod needs to come in here and break it up. The boys are gettin a little too testosterone-y.



Everyone go back to your profiles and start posting nice comments. Ok ?? Please. I hate it when someone is ganged up on. If they are doing something wrong, don't you think the mods will pick up on it?

Though I previously added gas to the fire, agreed. Close this or at least bring us back on topic. Maybe discuss the value importance of the reputation system. It is almost an innate way of keeping members in check. Or maybe it doesn't. Maybe the reputation suppresses minority opinion in fear of a negative score? All valuable hypotheses that need further investigation.

[Skudor]

I´m warming to it. It seems it´s limited to one plus and one minus per day, or something like that (although they do seem to stack up a bit if you don't use them for a while). I guess on aggregate they will be used correctly - to reward good posts (and posters) and the reverse.

[jaguar007]

but i know i have a better chance of seducing Emma Watson then of seeing 007 in New York.

I doubt that.

[Aris007]

I´m warming to it. It seems it´s limited to one plus and one minus per day, or something like that (although they do seem to stack up a bit if you don't use them for a while). I guess on aggregate they will be used correctly - to reward good posts (and posters) and the reverse.

Well I don't think there's a limit to +1 or -1 on a day. I have had a +2 or a -2 in a day. I also believe that as time goes by we tend to use it in a more proper way.

[stromberg]

I also believe that as time goes by we tend to use it in a more proper way.

I do hope so.

Checked it out in the board system (took some time as I didn't know where to look it up):
The limits are 10 positive and 5 negatives per 24 hours.

[Jump James]

Deleted.

Edited by Jump James, 20 November 2010 - 04:49 PM.

[DamnCoffee]