   Why do I rate people?
  To discuss, as well as to provide future reference for my ratings, I thought I could describe what leads me to rating people up or down. I rate people up when they provide an answer that is both clear and exact, either to one of my questions or to someone else. Thus, I never rate people up in the lounge, no matter what they post. A clear but inexact answer (such as an incorrect statement about an obscure property where no statement at all could have sufficed) or an exact but unclear answer (a long rant about LR(1) language properties that a Master's student would be uncomfortable with, when a download link to Bison was the only question) do not qualify, though the answer need not be in explicit relationship to the question (for instance, mentioning the existence of std::string to a char* user).I rate people down when they display an unability to reason within the bounds expected by society. Most fallacies (starting with the Ad Hominem and Appeal to Authority but spanning most of these) lead to a rating decrease. The lack of punctuation or capital letters, incorrect spelling, faulty grammar and improper addressing are never grounds for a decrease but weigh heavily in its favor. Neither is stubbornness a reprehensible trait, although standing up against indisputable proof (such as a reference document or an english grammar textbook) is a sure-fire way to quicken my anger. The definition of "indisputable" is naturally a personal one, though I deem myself mature enough not to regard anything as indiscutable save for raw scientific facts or universal conventions.I never impose a negative rating for a single post (unless it is so woefully deserving of it that I cannot hold back) but rather dispense one when several consecutive posts share the same flaws, even more so in the face of constructive criticism on these very points. I never rate more than one step on the rating scale at a time, leaving me the option to increase or decrease the rating again should need be.[Edited by - ToohrVyk on July 24, 2006 2:32:17 AM]
  I am rather confused about the purpose of this thread...Are we supposed to talk about how we rate people...or like, comment on how you do it?  Whats the deal?   ;Quote:Original post by visageI am rather confused about the purpose of this thread...Are we supposed to talk about how we rate people...or like, comment on how you do it?  Whats the deal?Well, both :) I'd like to see how your way of rating people differs from mine. ;  I rate people at random, often for imagined slights against my honour or character. Sometimes I even do it based on their nickname, avatar, religious beliefs, or favoured programming environment.I also often do it when they can't take a joke.My positive ratings come from my affiliation with the GDNet "old boys" club, the Nosferatu, the Illuminati, and a secret sect of fascists deep beneath the Earth's crust.   ;  Hmm, I've started rating people down for misinformation on the Beginners board. I've pissed a few people off with that policy already, but I seriously feel it's one area where people should either stick to facts, or shut the hell up. Beginners don't need opinionated ignorant "advice", and trying to give them that will earn a prompt rate-- from me. (Yes, I'm a bastard)Of course it sucks for the newbie who's just trying to be helpful, but it'd suck even more for the newbie who asked a question, to be misinformed by those "helpful" people.They also don't need long rambling answers that try to educate the poor newbie about unrelated subjects he clearly has no knowledge of  yet, and in *really* bad cases, this might earn a step down the rating ladder too. (That's rare, but has happened. Confusing a newbie isn't a nice thing to do)I mostly rate people up when they add something significant to a discussion. Either by clearly and concisely answering the original question, or by  elaborating on a previous answer, bringing up important and relevant aspects the OP should also take into consideration.Oh, and being friendly/polite helps too. Being able to discuss a subject without resorting to personal attacks, or criticising other posts without offending anyone can earn a slight rate++ as well.I don't have a problem with rating multiple "steps" at a time, or doing so for a single post (although I obviously only do that when I feel it's deserved). But then again, nor do I have a problem with completely changing an older rating.I try to be careful with ratings in the lounge, but hey, if people are really helpful/polite and careful not to piss people off needlessly in a political discussion, that can earn a rating too. And vice versa, if your contribution to the discussion is a string of insults to people who disagree, you'll be rated down. Whether I agree with your opinion or not.   ;  I rate people up for helping me out with bugs or providing me with useful information. Sometimes though I will rate someone up just because they are at a 99 mark. I also remember rating up Strider Hiryu just because that was my favorite Genesis game. Seriously though, that game was awesome. I very rarely rate somebody down.   ;  personal attacks but i don't rate down or up based on agreement, only on enlightment (assuming we're talking about the Lounge). other than that: up for helpfulness, down for unrighteous hate and misinformation.   ;Quote:Original post by RavuyaMy positive ratings come from my affiliation with the GDNet "old boys" club, the Nosferatu, the Illuminati, and a secret sect of fascists deep beneath the Earth's crust.Dracula?!   ;  I rated that guy who posted images of Keyra Augustina up.   ;  I try to make sure I rate everyone up that has rated me up.Other than, that I'm not very specific, other than for the people who comment on my Dev journal.   