<p>jym, I am already missing you but I am happy that the Reputex works for G.O.D.</p>
<p>You guys are great! I needed 8 points yesterday to reach 4,000 and with your help I’m now at over 4,600! Thanks!</p>
<p>Cross-posted with our other major thread:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, so here’s is a first-round list of “worthy” contributors, as recommended by our regulars (the last fellow has given me lots of advice about Brown for my son). I will be using 2 of my daily 10 to hit these folks until they reach 11 squares, at which point they can be replaced with new suggestions. Six names should be enough for 2 each for 3 days, after which a repeat is available.</p>
<p>I hope many of you regulars will also participate. Would someone like to volunteer to maintain a list of incoming worthy candidate suggestions and post updated lists as the current ones are maxed out?</p>
<p>Here’s our initial “hit list.” Feel free to prioritize to your taste in any order:</p>
<p>kelsmom
ucbalumnus
CardinalFang
missypie
Chedva
Uroogla</p>
<p>Edit: Opps. Forgot to add Silverturtle. Let’s finish him off!</p>
<p>So, shall we try to use our “powers” in the way they were originally intended?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can be the sexytary for the hit/gangrene/greenie group hug suggestion list. If I see that they have received a “reputation beyond repute” then I’ll roll them off the list. </p>
<p>One’s choice to rep someone in the list is voluntary of course because of the “pohtayto/pohtahto” comment by kinderny wherein a member may think the poster is helpful/agreeable has the opposite effect on other users.</p>
<p>KrLililes= Sexytary for the Advancement of Green.</p>
<p>Thanks for volunteering, Krlilies! You should probably cross-post this on the other thread.</p>
<p>Don’t you think 11 squares (1500 points) is enough? Only greenie-nerds like us notice the difference between 11 squares and 11 squares plus a “reputation beyond repute.” Seems to me those extra 500 points could be better allocated elsewhere. The folks we select will, in most cases, pick up stray points over time and eventually hit the 2000 mark anyway.</p>
<p>You’re right as always m’Lord Lorem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, that cat has been out of the bag for a long time. I cannot stress enough how WRONG this latest twist is. You could not embark on a worst quest, or the ideal quest to see the entire reputation index deleted. </p>
<p>Some have pointed to the great camaraderie that was generated in the EARLY days and the fun it was to decipher the codes and see the changes on the way to gather 2,000 points, this new pursuit is not only silly but entirely detrimental to the intent of the “system.”</p>
<p>In a way, I believe that the powers-to-be did overlook the gamesmanship as long as it was confined to a couple of threads that competed for great fun or silliness. Pursuing a plan to bring up unsuspecting members through stealth tactics of powerleveling is just a short step of plain crazy. </p>
<p>I shared the same opinion when people went beyond 2,000 (and all the way to the present lunacy of 10,000 and above. So this is not new. But I really, really want to discourage to adopt and make this latest movement a reality. </p>
<p>Great powers come with enhanced responsibilities. Let the rest of the members play THEIR games.</p>
<p>oh, xiggi, you make much sense as usual…</p>
<p>Whoa, Last night 10k was just a distant dream, but thanks to a tremendous outpouring from all of you, I awoke with 9745 points. Milestone imminent! </p>
<p>If you happened to send green between 8:51pm PT (Crittermom) and 5:28am PT (blackeyedsusan), please let me know. I missed the overnight action and would love to repay.</p>
<p>Oops, sorry that my cross post was off topic. Task force needed!</p>
<p>I say this with utmost respect to you Xiggi. (see me bowing right now) If I see a post and I like what the member said in another thread then I add to the person’s reputation. Since some of us are new members we do not know who has given helpful advice for the past years. </p>
<p>So when Lorem, psychmom, NorthMinnesota or confetti247 suggests we look at a certain member, I search the member’s previous posts. If I like the post then I do add to his reputation. I don’t see anything wrong with that. The list is merely a compiled suggestion not a coerced ambush that you seem to imply.</p>
<p>I have been on CC silently for about 5 years now, but I just made an account recently. I have to say though: Hands-down, this is the strangest, coolest, most bizarre and creative thread I have read on this site.</p>
<p>Carry on please.</p>
<p>Krlilies, I also have utmost respect for the people who played the game. I do think there were positives in the perhaps silly pursuit of seeing the labels change and deciphering how the points worked. </p>
<p>I fully understand the part of rewarding a good post when you see one, but do you REALLY believe that the listing of the names in an organized fashion will not result in multiple hits and bring the collective power of each “gun” to the Big Bertha level? How many people from THIS thread does it require to generate 2,000 points at once? Make it a game and the numbers will get even bigger! </p>
<p>My opinion is one of the E Pluribus Unum kind. It is only one opinion among many. I think it will be and is a mistake to organize “powerleveling” and have the experience of having played (way too much) MMORPG to back me up!</p>
<p>Roger has added an opt out feature
[College</a> Confidential - FAQ: User Profile Features](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/faq.php?faq=vb3_user_profile#faq_vb3_reputation]College”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/faq.php?faq=vb3_user_profile#faq_vb3_reputation)</p>
<p>…lets see what happens now</p>
<p>will curmudgeon be the first to opt out?</p>
<p>Sax, even though it says that I don’t believe they’ve actually made it possible to opt out. Those instructions have been there for a while and that’s the very first thing I tried more than a month ago – to opt out. Followed the instructions again after seeing your post, and unless there’s something I’m missing, you still can’t.</p>
<p>Gosh-- I turn the reins over to others and you run amuk! Please, PLEASE listen to xiggi. As I said in the other thread yesterday <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15374326-post2476.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15374326-post2476.html</a> the important part of that post is this: **But what I won’t do is confuse some poor unsuspecting (especially new) poster with a greenie shower ambush or mess with other threads. Its been fun to play here and get to know you all a bit better, to enjoy witicisms and quips. But we should behave. **
Turning the intent of the reps on its head and having fun with it was entertaining, and a great way to get to know posters with whom many of us might not have come into contact. That said, please PLEASE draw the line at being disruptive, even if it is intended to be well meaning. Please remember that the “I agree with poetgrl” was seen as disruptive <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15315501-post260.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15315501-post260.html</a> and ambushing unsuspecting posters, even with the best of intents, can be confusing and disruptive. </p>
<p>Now BEHAVE everyone, or I will have to return and rule with an iron fist :mad:</p>
<p>Ah Jym, I fear we will be extinct without you soon. Alas. </p>
<p>Peeps, listen to Jym and Xiggi. Really.</p>
<p>if you go around playing the game out in the forums, the game will be disbanded. Poof.</p>
<p>I am so confused how people see things differently. I read a post in this thread or other threads and if I like it then I green the member. Again, as I said in post #2692 if some other members suggest other members (for example, silverturtle or xiggi actually at the beginning of the game) as helpful and I search the member’s post and I like it then I rep it. I’m truly scratching my head why this act is considered disruptive? I’m trying to understand as I am truly confuddled and need someone to hold my hand and gently tell me why this is wrong?</p>
<p>Its not “wrong” in the moral sense. I rep posts I like all of the time.</p>
<p>It is wrong in the CC sense, as in no mob actions. No, it’s just that on these two threads we are a contained and mild group, but out in the forums we might be seen as the hooligans we truly are. :D</p>
<p>Avoid the appearance of the power grab at all times. There is a kind of internal logic to the way CC works. There is a lot of tolerance for off topic conversation and whatnot, until it gets out of hand. </p>
<p>It’s the old, “it’s always funny until somebody loses and eye, and then it is still funny to a select few” logic. Lorem is clearly that select few, and for that we all love him. Others in the forums might be alarmed by the greenie rebellion.</p>