Quote Originally Posted by harris7
if the names were shown for negative feed back then people would get pissed off they got it. Then give the person -feedback and it would start stupid feedback wars.
No see that is the deterrent. If the first person left negative feedback when it really wasn't warranted, they know that there is a good possibility they would get it back. Usually if a post is so bad that it deserves neg rep, there is a good chance they will receive it from more than one member. On another board I saw this guy get it from about 5 people on one post. He didn't retaliate either because he knew he was wrong and it would make it worse. The retaliation is the deterrent and so the name should be shown. It is like nuclear weapons. No one uses them because they will get nuked back. There is no need for mods to investigate negative rep. That sounds like a bunch of time consuming red tape. Now that would be censorship.

Other boards that use neg rep with the name shown really don't have a problem with neg rep much less a lot of neg rep usage.
FakeBoobsRule Reviewed by FakeBoobsRule on . A Comment on the Reputation System Before I start I just want to thank the mods and administrators for their hard work and I am glad they added the reputation system. However, there is a choice for negative reputation and I have no problem with that. What I don't like is when someone leaves negative reputation, it is done anonymously. If someone is going to say something negative about you it should have their name tagged to it. It is to easy for someone to hide behind a nameless insult just because their name is not Rating: 5