Cyraxpt: Ok, but should everyone be grateful? I didn't feel grateful so i didn't. And what would the point of the rep system be used in this case, to see who's grateful or not? A bit pretentious, no?
Sorry if it came across wrong. Yes some people do have a grudge (rightfully), but does it mean ,as some others said as well, NOT to just say thank you for the freebie? BUT such and such....
I did not tie it to the rep system as I just wanted to illustrate (and what you have just proven, yes strike ;) ) how easy people forget something good. (and no not done on purpose, I really swear!!!!)
As I said people tend to forget the good quicker....
Cyraxpt: Perhaps but it could also create witch hunts or fake reports. Let's say that i have a bunch of alt accounts and i have something against you, couldn't i just use them to accuse you of boosting your rep with alt accounts? I mean, you can't prove those accounts don't belong to you.
point taken, but what did I say in post one: "false reporting of a claim (abuse of the rules)"
under point 2.
And again next test to be applied repeated.
Everyone can make a mistake. Hence the repetition being needed, do I need to make it clearer in the OP? (asking/suggestions)
Witch hunt/fake reports would back-fire onto the reporter if he does it more then once. But don't forget manual operation here. (another safeguard)
I roll over to the next part as this overlaps, me thinks.
Cyraxpt: And who is going to verify each thread of each section/subforum to see if the rep wasn't boosted? And what about the alt accounts that already exist?
Well, we can't really discuss this then since we don't know if it's a minor modification or/and safe, i mean, you're talking about creating a set of rules in order for the rep system to work...
That is up for us the same way as we already identify scammers or similar. Me thinks, but maybe up for discussion.
But as I indicated, one thing, if scammer accounts disappear from the forum, they would need to start from scratch, in a really hard way, agreed? If we have doubt about a user, we could check for the upvotes, who does it, where when and so on, right?
for the safe part, knowing a wee bit ;) about this, it would only crash the voting buttons. Safe who knows, as I said, didn't you wanted to get rid of it anyway ;)
Minor also, work associated with it, yes for sure.
But this is on a bigger scale a rather minor problem. Yes, it takes maybe 1-2 weeks to implement it (using 50% of a normal work-base), but the overall time needed depends a bit on the availability (and management).
But one reason to discuss it, would be also for GOG to see, what we want! (And yes keep further playing devils advocate or come up with new ideas :)
Let;s rephrase it, it seems that GOG finally realised that we are pissed off and they need to do something. No imagine the outcry if they just implement something on their own ;) Who knows maybe they learned ;)