Timeline for Should negative reputation be discouraged?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2010 at 20:41 | comment | added | Earlz | @Troggy, just curious. Is deleted content provided in the datadumps? | |
| May 7, 2010 at 20:15 | comment | added | Troggy | @Evan: All 10k users and mods can see all deleted content (questions/answers). Deleted comments actually get removed though. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 15:33 | comment | added | perbert | @Evan: every 10k+ user can see deleted posts. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 15:32 | comment | added | perbert | @devinb: he is merely a troll. I refuse to believe that a living person with enough brains to type on a keyboard is stupid enough to ask his questions he's asked. Every post is carefully crafted to be completely nonsensical, insulting or has been already discussed before, with him adding something that makes no sense. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 15:08 | comment | added | Evan Carroll | @Earlz, that's mean, but that's probably one of the reasons that people want to be a diamond mod. You get to see the material others can't. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 7:29 | comment | added | devinb | @alex His questions are reasonable, and are all asked in a brusque, abrasive fashion. If someone polished them up with editing, some of them would even get upvotes. Most of them would be downvoted, because people don't like the ideas. But Meta is a place for disagreement. This is literally where we go to fight about the goals and future of the site. If we start banning people for not agreeing, then we're going to have a pretty incestuous little cabal. Maybe we could convince him to be one of us... one of us... one of us... one of us... | |
| May 7, 2010 at 7:23 | comment | added | alex | @devinb It's called trolling, it's as simple as that. How can anyone be as naive as him and ask this question: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/49046/…? | |
| May 7, 2010 at 7:18 | comment | added | devinb | (-1) Evan's questions aren't offensive, he just had a series of bad ideas that everyone disagreed with. Furthermore, people will notice something with many negative votes and, like moths to a flame, gather around to watch it burn. So, having a few negative votes means that he gets even more negative votes. And then he hasn't helped matters by being antagonistic. But in general, his repuation loss has mostly been due to posting a disliked idea, then defending it boorishly. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 7:07 | comment | added | alex | @Earlz The problem with what you're proposing is that you give too much power to moderators and it makes it hard for others to see what's going on behind the scenes. It's better to have the whole community see what the "offending material" is. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 6:50 | comment | added | Earlz | @alex yea but it's much less satisfying to be an idiot when only 10k and diamond moderators can see it | |
| May 7, 2010 at 6:49 | history | edited | Earlz | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 14 characters in body; added 129 characters in body
|
| May 7, 2010 at 6:49 | comment | added | alex | They're already closely moderated. Evan is the perfect example; he keeps asking stupid questions without consequence, basically spamming the whole place. Why draw even more attention to their stuff? Simply sin bin them and let them cool off for a while. | |
| May 7, 2010 at 6:44 | history | answered | Earlz | CC BY-SA 2.5 |