You assume otherwise?

Also I think it is worth noting that initially, until people start getting several votes under their belt, the rankings are going to fluctuate wildly. So no reason to get upset and throw a tantrum if you are in the red.

We are still trying to figure out the system... we were all supposed to start from scratch but suddenly reputation points went through the roof, so please bear with us. The idea was to make it a good feature for everyone.

It does serve a purpose.
The intent is for people to rate the post, and therefore over time a person's ranking becomes a loose indicator of how trustworthy the advice given is. If we have a member that continually offers shoddy advice their rating will be lower than one that consistently gives poor advice.

There are restrictions on the ratings too so it would be very difficult to abuse the system.

The terms are at the default ones so far and can be changed and likely will.

Rarely are things ever perfect when they first get implemented, and this will no doubt see some changes in how it works. If you don't like it then just ignore it.

What is all that about? There is/was something wierd with the ratings yesterday when it was first implemented. It was only taking 1 vote to run people up that high, if you look several other members have it too, it wasn't just Rick and I. Julio and I both said in this thread there would be some issues with it as we are trying to get things worked out.

There is a limit on how many in a 24 hour period.

Also if you rate person X something you must rate a certain number of other people before you are allowed to rate person X again.

Why are you so against this other than "ridiculous" "booooring!" and "nonsense". What do you have to lose in it?

You don't have to rate every post of course. The original intention was to have it display what a particular post was given, the average. So if you saw a particularly good post or a particularly bad post you could rate that. Regardless of how much someone wants to help, if they post bad advice it is still bad advice, this helps give an indication to the person (or anyone else) needing help on a problem which posts are good. It would be similar to digg.com's system of public up or down ratings, and hopefully in time we get that worked out. Ratings wouldn't be displayed until 3 or 5 or 10 or whatever were recorded, so 1 negative rating doesn't kill the credibility of the post.

A lot of things that got discussed before implementing this aren't working/avaiable yet.

I hope RBS's adament refusal to accept this is because there was no OFFICIAL explanation of what is happening and he is just lashing out at the current state of this feature. I hoped the comments by Julio and myself would be enough, but apparently they aren't. It hasn't even been 48 hours since it began.

WE (TS) want to make this forum as good as possible, does anyone actually think we just tossed this out there without thinking and discussion on it? IF we can't get everything we want out of it I imagine it will get removed, but we think this can be a benefit not a detriment.

What is the significance of the darker and lighter shades of green? And obviously, I'm not talking about myself.