Why are downvotes limited?

[happy_tiger]

I had and disagreed with your opinion …same as you are disagreeing with many’s opinion’s now
Some on here like a joke or banter after a hard’s days work …Mods pull it up if it goes over the top …it’s their Forum when push comes to shove …you have to live by their rules …bit like when you get a home loan …you choose what you want …don’t complain when your not happy with it …change banks

So I should leave the forum if I don't agree with you?

If what you are saying is correct, the forum rules should be changed to reflect that. The rules about abusing players and officials should be removed. The rules about hijacking threads should be removed.

Nah mate ...not at all ....but your trying to tell Mods how to run their Forum ....Kul , Willow Mike Geo and the others put hours into this place ..who are we to tell them to change it ..make suggestions ...Kul is a reasonable bloke and will consider it

 

[Sart0ri]

Because civilised people have conversations.

There is a time and a place for everything

 

[Red88_Tiger]

This thread is like being on the playground at school when punches are about to be thrown. Smile on your face while looking over your shoulder hoping the teacher doesn’t come over and shut it down.

Nah mate ...just stating you'll never have a perfect forum and it would turn me off if we ever did

Just my amusing view of entire thread reading it through.

 

[avocadoontoast]

I really enjoyed the cats and magpie discussion.

That's great but why can't there be banter sections where people can relax and have fun and content sections like "Signing suggestions and rumours"

It’s the off-season, who cares. And the whole point of a forum is engagement.

 

[mike]

Because civilised people have conversations.

There is a time and a place for everything

Yep, and this forum, because of how well it is run and moderated, is one of them.

 

[happy_tiger]

This thread is like being on the playground at school when punches are about to be thrown. Smile on your face while looking over your shoulder hoping the teacher doesn’t come over and shut it down.

Nah mate ...just stating you'll never have a perfect forum and it would turn me off if we ever did

Just my amusing view of entire thread reading it through.

My only comment I guess is thats how we all roll I guess lol

We all agree on wanting better for this club and winning premierships ...how we get their efficiently will always be disputed

 

[Sart0ri]

but your trying to tell Mods how to run their Forum

I originally asked "why are downvotes limited?" which is only a question.

But thanks for butting in again trying to make an argument to get involved in.

 

[Sart0ri]

In the past we had people have all out wars with each other over down-voting
You will survive if you run out of your daily quota

Thank you for answering my question.

 

[mike]

but your trying to tell Mods how to run their Forum

I originally asked "why are downvotes limited?" which is only a question.

But thanks for butting in again trying to make an argument to get involved in.

Well you got your answer from @Kul but it appears you didn’t like the reasoning.

 

[Sart0ri]

lol, bad timing @Mike

 

[mike]

lol, bad timing @Mike

I stand corrected

 

[Sart0ri]

Well you got your answer from @Kul but it appears you didn’t like the reasoning.

And thanks for making up a story about me to make your point.

 

[happy_tiger]

but your trying to tell Mods how to run their Forum

I originally asked "why are downvotes limited?" which is only a question.

But thanks for butting in again trying to make an argument to get involved in.

Willow answered it ..and then you got annoyed he brought up cats ...this was my original point ...can't anyone call you out ??


You can't have it both ways .....

 

[Sart0ri]

Willow answered it …and then you got annoyed he brought up cats …this was my original point …can’t anyone call you out ??
You can’t have it both ways …

Please provide the quote where @willow answered the question.
Also provide the quote where I mentioned cats.

 

[happy_tiger]

Willow answered it …and then you got annoyed he brought up cats …this was my original point …can’t anyone call you out ??
You can’t have it both ways …

Please provide the quote where @willow answered the question.
Also provide the quote where I mentioned cats.

Willow enforces the rules ..Kul makes the rules

 

[happy_tiger]

I don't want to fight everyone and I understand that people want different things out of the forum.

I think the forum could be better for everyone if the rules were enforced.

The same people hijack every thread with jokes and banter, like they have with this one taking about cats and magpies.
The same Negative Nellie's post the same things over and over and the Positive Pollyanna's rarely post because how do you argue with "Luke Brooks is pus"

This one ...cats

Sorry CB didn't mean to leave you out of the Mods conversation


You've brought all this up with 3 mods CB ,Willow and Mike this place doesn't run without them

 

[Sart0ri]

This one …cats

You got me there, and the @willow one?

 

[Sart0ri]

Admins, please close this thread, my question has been answered

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Anything that is based on opinion is effectively pointless to argue, because it is subjective.
If you’re negging 30 posts a day rather than expressing why you disagree, then that would suggest that the rep system is actively working against what a forum is set up to do: have people engage with one another, be it positive or negative.

The original question which still has not been answered, is why we can only downvote 10 posts a day.

There is no limit on upvotes, are they different somehow?

I can post that a player, coach or member of Tigers management is puke a thousand times, there is no limit on spamming an opinion.

I did not set the system up. But we have had issues with it in the past with users just using it in a passive aggressive manner. It created more problems.

I'm no psychologist, but people are probably more likely to respond to others' opinions that they too share, because there's no risk in being shouted down when you agree. I feel giving people carte blanche to neg rep anyone they like removes the incentive to discuss opinions you don't necessarily share.

I take your point about how do you argue a repetitive subjective opinion you don't share (i.e. Luke Brooks is pus,) but at the end of the day you could always just read on. If someone provides repetitive useless input that you don't value, you can always foe them.

At the end of the day that's up to Kul to implement and amend. The rest of us just monitor and manage it.

 

[Geo]

Not until @cochise apologises for squshing the Magpie