|
Post by UnklMickey on Dec 29, 2005 22:32:02 GMT -5
won't have much net access til next tuesday, when i'll return to my same old opinion-about-everything self.
but i HAD to use the little time i do have to ask about this brand new karma thing.
sounds like a good idea on the surface, BUT.
this forum usually operates in a TOO polite mode!
yes there is such a thing, and y'all are living proof.
i hope this doesn't cause the most of you to hold back on voicing respectful, but dissenting opinions. we need honest debates IMHO.
so how does the karma counter work? just the total of exalts minus smites as a total?
i'll probably remain pretty close to zero as i no doubt have, and continue to will irritate as many folks as i help. loose cannons are like that.
kinda wish it was two separate columns. one for positive one for negative. but then again i'd probably max out both (well at least the negative anyway)
if you pass a certain threshold of negative karma, are you marked for deletion?
or is your karma rating just a badge of honor (or dishonor as the case may be)?
well anyway, i see a ton has gone down on the boards in the last few days. i'll have lots of stuff to talk with youse guys next tues if if not sooner.
unk
EDIT: i recently noticed that you only get one exalt/smite to give each day. seems like a good way to keep folks from getting carried away. don't waste 'em frivolously.
2nd EDIT: had a PM conversation with RH. karma doesn't have any effect on member standing, other than a badge of (dis)honor.
separate totals for smite and exalt aren't possible, nor is assigning what post earned someone issuing a karma modification. i sorta thought not when i mentioned it, but i always seem to think of weird stuff like that.
all in all, the karma thing is probably good, doesn't seem to get in the way or anything.
might have be a nice thing to have if we get someone on-board who is totally full of B.S. -- .:LSHIASMP:.
that would probably be the only way anyone on this board would have a negative total
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Dec 30, 2005 22:33:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bam on Dec 31, 2005 23:10:48 GMT -5
not that nasty, wolf. you're right about this, I think.
|
|
|
Post by UnklMickey on Jan 3, 2006 16:34:32 GMT -5
...Well, it's nasty by this board's standards. ;D
my point exactly. what would be considered "a little bit nasty" on other boards would be seem like thermonuclear war on this one.
|
|