SRL Archive - News and General

People now of days just use (de)rep as a way to anonymously flame people. If the user had a real reason to derep the user, they would have no problems with their username being listed on it. So, should rep remain anonymous? Discuss.

Rep should just be removed entirely

Have the square things based on how much you donated. It's just like buying DLC!

Keep it anonymous imo. Its just best that way. Also I dont de rep to flame people.

I voted – because whatevs. :)

Poeple should be able to see who is saying what about them :)

Don't really care, but I imagine I would feel bad if that would happen to me. We're not community of kids tho.

Meh, should be an option to remain anonymous. Some people would like to remain anonymous when repping and derepping, while others might want to show who they are.

Stay anonymous imo.

I've never derepped somebody and if I were to do so then the end of the world would come.

People shouldn't really care much what others comment. Plus you can always disable your Rep…

I think that rep shouldn't be removed. It's always nice to see someone giving you some rep+. I sometimes don't take the time to comment and I just rep them so they would see that I appreciate their work work/statement or whatever. Also, if you really have something to say, you should sign yourself, I always do :)

The main issue with removing the anonymous rep would be retaliation on derep. If people dereping you offends you, or hurts your feelings in any way then turn reputation off in your profile options. That is my two cents on this subject.

I support, if its really private and you want to have a beef with some one, message that person and sort it out. Besides, Wizzup's Eye SEES ALL :sasmokin:

From: sf411
The main issue with removing the anonymous rep would be retaliation on derep. If people dereping you offends you, or hurts your feelings in any way then turn reputation off in your profile options. That is my two cents on this subject.

Mainly because it's abused to just flame people anonymously. If they had a true reason to flame they could post it in the thread, or deal with their name being out there.

You know, stuff like that.

But the old reps made when it WAS anonymous would be now shown? I don't think that's a good idea…

I actually don't care not a single bit if it was shown.. someone wants to flame anonymously then fine.. I just ignore them.. if they got something to say to me personally then they leave their name else their comments and de-reps really mean nothing..

if I ever de-rep you'd definitely see my name and a reason why.. never de-repped anyone thus far so meh.. but overall I see why some would wanna be anonymous.. and I see why others just don't care.
For me, rep is about how much u contribute.. u contribute something, I give u positive rep or I'd just post a nice comment.. u piss me off, I don't even bother de-repping.. waste of time.

From: MylesMadness
But the old reps made when it WAS anonymous would be now shown? I don't think that's a good idea…

That's a painful lesson in life; when you think you're all hidden and godlike, when it comes back around to bite you in the arse. ;)

Why does rep matter to you? Honestly.

I support. I've gotten de repped so much times for stupid ass reasons by anonymous people.

From: Sex
Why does rep matter to you? Honestly.

It doesn't. I even have it disabled. It just doesn't create a nice community if people use rep as a way to anonymously flame.

From: Harry
It doesn't. I even have it disabled. It just doesn't create a nice community if people use rep as a way to anonymously flame.

I must agree with that. I see no point of giving too much importance to rep. What will it bring to you? Fame? More scripts? Just have a good relationship with the whole community, and you shall see a big difference, at the way that someone talks to you :) .

Why does anyone care? You get de-repped (for a good or bad reason), deal with it and move on. Don't complain like a child.

From: Coh3n
Why does anyone care? You get de-repped (for a good or bad reason), deal with it and move on. Don't complain like a child.

Yeah, there's nothing you can do when you are de-repped. Rise your head, and keep looking forward.

From: Coh3n
Why does anyone care? You get de-repped (for a good or bad reason), deal with it and move on. Don't complain like a child.

I'm not complaining, but I would still like to see who has de-rep'd me or rep'd me. No matter what the reason is.

From: Frement
I'm not complaining, but I would still like to see who has de-rep'd me or rep'd me. No matter what the reason is.

And you can, can you not?

I'm for the idea. Good thread, Harry. :)

This is a bit off-topic, but what do blue-rep-squares mean?

From: Flight
I'm for the idea. Good thread, Harry. :)

This is a bit off-topic, but what do blue-rep-squares mean?

People that have less than 1 rep power.

Not that it really matters to me but if you don't have the balls to say what you think to someone with them knowing it's you then you shouldn't be saying it.

That being said if you still want to be a pansy you can talk trash anoymously over email or some other way.

Wizzup and other admins see anyways. So does anyone that asks or when admins have fun posting their logs.

Just my opinion, don't care though so don't bother trying to troll me over this post.

One question…rep-squares goes up depending on points we've got?
If so, how many points do we need to get a certain rep-square?

Yeah I agree with that, Wanted.

@Coh3n;
I just read your earlier posts, sorry for the delay lol… Anyways, like Frement said, I don't think anyone's really getting upset or worked up about the fact that it's a de-rep, as I don't think that's the issue at hand here. I think it's nice to know who changed your reputation. The same applies even to the opposite, +rep. How would you know who to thank or appreciate for doing so?

From: Coh3n
Why does anyone care? You get de-repped (for a good or bad reason), deal with it and move on. Don't complain like a child.

Do you miss the point I am trying to say, or do you feel the community is ok with such stuff? It's Javabot-tier behavior in the way people have came to use the anonymous rep feature.

I say just let it go. So many people "don't care" about reputation, yet there are numerous threads about it. Trolls will be trolls, there's no getting around that. If someone wants you to know who they are whether it is rep+ or rep- they can easily enough sign their name. If it's a compliment, then take it as such and be happy. If it's something negative or perhaps a "flame" comment, then take it constructively or just let it go.

Threads like this simply 'feed the fire' honestly. I understand it can be frustrating, but such is life my friend. It's up to you to interpret it how you see fit, but in the end things still move on.

Because it's good to allow people to anonymously flame people, amirite? Makes a nice friendly community that people want to come back to.

I don't know what you're trying to argue. Do you want to see who gave rep? I thought you could already?

From: Harry
Because it's good to allow people to anonymously flame people, amirite? Makes a nice friendly community that people want to come back to.

Nah man you're supposed to take their messages constructively.

I can't wait to contemplate the message behind this comment

You trivial son of a mother duck.

When I figure it out I'll be sure to apply that to my life.

From: Coh3n
And you can, can you not?

No, but you probably can because of your Administrator status.

From: Harry
Because it's good to allow people to anonymously flame people, amirite? Makes a nice friendly community that people want to come back to.

I can only imagine that someone "flaming" someone else for any reason at all would be provoked by something. It doesn't seem to happen to me (probably will now), but I would assume that's because I don't really give anyone a reason.

No, I don't think it's right, and I would infract anyone I saw doing so without reason. I would imagine if it's truly becoming a problem you could perhaps consult an admin and ask for the situation to be handled? By that I mean a PM via the forums, or maybe MSN or IRC.

This isn't really my place to say how things should be done, and I'm not trying to lecture to you or anything. I'm simply expressing my views on the situation is all. :redface:

From: NCDS
I can only imagine that someone "flaming" someone else for any reason at all would be provoked by something.

No, it's just people being jerks because they can and because they think they're anonymous so nothing will happen to them. No reason at all.

What Harry is saying is that there is no point of having anonymous reps because there are no pretty much no pros, only cons.

The reason for changing it is a preventive measure.

Someone has to the power to fix it, so why doesn't it get fixed?

Maybe someone is implying it isn't the role of the administrators to deal with these types of problems, and just not worry about them.

What an interesting philosophy.

From: Harry
No, it's just people being jerks because they can and because they think they're anonymous so nothing will happen to them. No reason at all.

As far as I know, giving negative rep isn't against the rules, so I don't think that would matter. People can +rep or -rep for whatever reason they please, whether the person receiving the rep likes it or not.

It doesn't matter if the rep is anonymous or not, it's still going to happen. The entire rep system pisses me off because it leads to pointless arguments like this (no offense, Harry).

From: Coh3n
As far as I know, giving negative rep isn't against the rules, so I don't think that would matter. People can +rep or -rep for whatever reason they please, whether the person receiving the rep likes it or not.

Yet, it is against the rules to flame someone? But when it is a rep it is not considered a flame?

From: Coh3n
it leads to pointless arguments like this (no offense, Harry).

24 to 4 (6 to 1 ~ 86%) people agree that reps should not be anonymous and it's a "pointless argument"?

Rep rank is option that you choose to turn off or on. If you decide to leave it on it is by your doing that you allow someone to mess with said rank. If you do not like it disable it.

From: sf411
Rep rank is option that you choose to turn off or on. If you decide to leave it on it is by your doing that you allow someone to mess with said rank. If you do not like it disable it.

Regardless if it's disabled or not, you're still able to rep/de-rep the person.

Having it disabled just means you don't want to use it for e-peen or something like that since it's not shown on your profile/posts.

From: Coh3n
I don't know what you're trying to argue. Do you want to see who gave rep? I thought you could already?

No we can't see who gives rep thats the point of this thread

If reputation is not anonymous, then it will greatly reduce the amount of negative reputations received. As the majority of negative reputations are a result of "flame-wars" with the sole reason of anonymity.

My vote: should be open.

We should make forum currency, and each time you rep someone you get 10m villavu coins, which is worth one ha'penny. And each time you de rep someone you owe villavu $0.02 (get it?).

I find it silly that you, Harry, are against privacy in this situation, though.

From: Wanted
What Harry is saying is that there is no point of having anonymous reps because there are no pretty much no pros, only cons.

The reason for changing it is a preventive measure.

Someone has to the power to fix it, so why doesn't it get fixed?

Maybe someone is implying it isn't the role of the administrators to deal with these types of problems, and just not worry about them.

What an interesting philosophy.

If you like preventive measures, you must also be in favour of removing all guns from civilians, no? Perhaps we should also disallow tor altogether, start enforcing every ISP to do DPI and all connect our facebook account to everything else on the internet. What a wonderful philosophy.

Harry, I find it odd you're typically in favour of anonymity (like with SRL-Stats), but now you suddenly want rep to be public? If rep was public, people would not de-rep anyone, because they'd be ``afraid'' of getting flamed, getting into a childish fight, etc. The people who whine about receiving negative rep are just silly as they always state they don't care about reputation anyways. And it's not like reputation is _the_ way to flame someone and you can just as easily make another account, email someone, find them on IRC, etc. If you do everything to prevent flame-wars, the tension will only build up. There's nothing wrong with the occasional flame war; it helps clear things up that usual social manners cannot.

Probably the biggest advantage and disadvantage of the internet is the ability to be anonymous. You can say what's on your mind without your name attached to the post (good), but it's easy to start thinking it's ok to say anything. (bad)

What goes for the topic I think an open enviorement if always better. True, the amount of de-reps would decline, which just shows people are not willing to stand behind their own opinions.

I don't really care about the rep system so I wouldn't mind if it got removed completely, but if the choice is between 2 options I go with anti-anonymity.

It is very annoying when people use rep to flame instead of using it for what it is there for.

For example: After making this post http://villavu.com/forum/showpost.php?p=827337&postcount=18 I got derepped for "I disapprove the negativity."

Yeah good one, you could have just written that in the thread to me. Didn't have to involve lowering my rep

Well, this thread is now pointless, since Wizzup? is against the idea it won't happen. Anyways…

From: Wizzup?
If rep was public, people would not de-rep anyone, because they'd be ``afraid'' of getting flamed, getting into a childish fight, etc.

If it were public, only those with a genuine reason will de-rep those. It wouldn't end in flame wars.

From: Wizzup?

The people who whine about receiving negative rep are just silly as they always state they don't care about reputation anyways.

That's because when people receive positive reputation, they feel good about themselves. When they receive negative reputation without a genuine reason and as such are a constant target of abuse, they will hold such a view.

From: Wizzup?
And it's not like reputation is _the_ way to flame someone and you can just as easily make another account, email someone, find them on IRC, etc.

Negative reputation would be the easiest to do and as such, is the most common. Of course, as you know, people have done what you had suggested in that statement (flame on IRC, make other accounts, etc).

From: Wizzup?
There's nothing wrong with the occasional flame war; it helps clear things up that usual social manners cannot.

What?? Flame wars are name just that, because they are hot. "Flaming, also known as bashing, is hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users" (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_war ) is completely unnecessary. Especially if you want a community that is respected.

If it isn't anonymous, then people can stand by their decision to give the negative reputation to an individual and not hide behind their 'anonymous' status. People mainly just neg rep others because they simply don't like the post nor the poster, not because it's invalid, inflammatory or against the forum rules.

EDIT: On the other hand, simply just disable negative rep altogether?

From: Daniel
Okay,

That's it. This thread is now pointless, since Wizzup? is against the idea it won't happen.

Night fellas'.

lol, is this true wizzup ? I'm sure wizzup would want what his community wants ?
I think this hole thread has gone a bit over board tbh. I would prefer to see who Repped me but its no big deal, just nice to know. I agree with wanted on this

From: Wanted
Not that it really matters to me but if you don't have the balls to say what you think to someone with them knowing it's you then you shouldn't be saying it.

That being said if you still want to be a pansy you can talk trash anoymously over email or some other way.

Other way to do it is The Bashing Club / BBQ Pit.

If someone wants to flame then to me they have a problem not me so I either put them straight or leave it if I think there's no helping someone.

From: Wizzup?
If you like preventive measures, you must also be in favour of removing all guns from civilians, no? Perhaps we should also disallow tor altogether, start enforcing every ISP to do DPI and all connect our facebook account to everything else on the internet. What a wonderful philosophy.

Harry, I find it odd you're typically in favour of anonymity (like with SRL-Stats), but now you suddenly want rep to be public? If rep was public, people would not de-rep anyone, because they'd be ``afraid'' of getting flamed, getting into a childish fight, etc. The people who whine about receiving negative rep are just silly as they always state they don't care about reputation anyways. And it's not like reputation is _the_ way to flame someone and you can just as easily make another account, email someone, find them on IRC, etc. If you do everything to prevent flame-wars, the tension will only build up. There's nothing wrong with the occasional flame war; it helps clear things up that usual social manners cannot.

Those ideas of forcing connecting to facebook and ISP matchups is a bit of a ridiculous comparison when it has so many adverse affects compared to say removing anonymous reputation which has no adverse implications.

If 6/7 people don't want anonymous reps, why not just get rid of it?

From: Wizzup?
Harry, I find it odd you're typically in favour of anonymity (like with SRL-Stats), but now you suddenly want rep to be public?

Those are 2 entirely different things. I don't believe in anonymity if its only being used to harass users and make the community a not-as-nice place to visit. Nothing else on this forum except for rep is anonymous, so why's that? If someone has a negative opinion about a post, they should have no problem with their name showing up. Dan explained it well.

Wizzup?: What's the downside of making rep public? I don't get it.

From: Daniel
Well, this thread is now pointless, since Wizzup? is against the idea it won't happen. Anyways…

I'm inclined to post my facepalm picture again. I don't know what made you think I'm that much against opening reputation? I just posted my opinion and was curious as to Harry's reasoning.

From: Daniel
If it were public, only those with a genuine reason will de-rep those. It wouldn't end in flame wars.

Do you truly believe this? You need a lecture on psychology.

From: Daniel

That's because when people receive positive reputation, they feel good about themselves. When they receive negative reputation without a genuine reason and as such are a constant target of abuse, they will hold such a view.

Negative reputation would be the easiest to do and as such, is the most common. Of course, as you know, people have done what you had suggested in that statement (flame on IRC, make other accounts, etc).

And this is a problem, how?

From: Daniel

What?? Flame wars are name just that, because they are hot. "Flaming, also known as bashing, is hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users" (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_war ) is completely unnecessary. Especially if you want a community that is respected.

If it isn't anonymous, then people can stand by their decision to give the negative reputation to an individual and not hide behind their 'anonymous' status. People mainly just neg rep others because they simply don't like the post nor the poster, not because it's invalid, inflammatory or against the forum rules.

EDIT: On the other hand, simply just disable negative rep altogether?

I must say I find it amusing that one day we're a communist regime not allowing people to speak up, or scaring people to speak up - and the next day we have to disable anonymity. Really now?

As for flame wars being bad - I can't say I agree. I myself like the occasional flame war for reasons stated in my previous posts. Honestly, if you get offended/hurt that easily then I can't believe how you manage in real life. People will sometimes hurt your feelings; and sometimes they're simply right even though the person in question won't see that at the time.

From: Wanted
Those ideas of forcing connecting to facebook and ISP matchups is a bit of a ridiculous comparison when it has so many adverse affects compared to say removing anonymous reputation which has no adverse implications.

If 6/7 people don't want anonymous reps, why not just get rid of it?

I don't feel it's too ridiculous. Sure, the scale is different but the ideology is somewhat similar.

As far 6/7, I somehow feel that it is not a very representative statistic… But it is indeed something to consider.

From: Harry
Those are 2 entirely different things. I don't believe in anonymity if its only being used to harass users and make the community a not-as-nice place to visit. Nothing else on this forum except for rep is anonymous, so why's that? If someone has a negative opinion about a post, they should have no problem with their name showing up. Dan explained it well.

Except that they won't.




All in all, I really don't see how it matters that much.

From: Wizzup?
Except that they won't.

I have no idea what you're referring to by this. What in my paragraph? If someone has a negative opinion about someones post - enough so to not silently ignore it and click a button - they should have enough courage to have their name posted there.

From: Harry
I have no idea what you're referring to by this. What in my paragraph? If someone has a negative opinion about someones post - enough so to not silently ignore it and click a button - they should have enough courage to have their name posted there.

So how does this distinguish you from posting loli, trolling people and posting other stuff that is illegal in some countries as ``Anonymous'' on sites like 4chan and krautchan? I just don't get it.

To be honest, the only good argument so far that I have seen is: "Everything else is not anonymous anyway".

From: Wizzup?
So how does this distinguish you from posting loli, trolling people and posting other stuff that is illegal in some countries as ``Anonymous'' on sites like 4chan and krautchan? I just don't get it.

To be honest, the only good argument so far that I have seen is: "Everything else is not anonymous anyway".

Comparing anonymous forums to a formal username forum? lol.

From: Harry
Comparing anonymous forums to a formal username forum? lol.

Well, why won't you post with your original name? Why do you use Anonymous? It's not like you can't use your own name.

From: Wizzup?
So how does this distinguish you from posting loli, trolling people and posting other stuff that is illegal in some countries as ``Anonymous'' on sites like 4chan and krautchan? I just don't get it.

To be honest, the only good argument so far that I have seen is: "Everything else is not anonymous anyway".

How does that in any way relate to the discussion at hand? Sounds like you're just taking hits at Harry the way you worded that.

I don't really care though, because a pretty decent amount of the community thinks the reason they get derepped is bullshit. Getting derepped because your opinion differs from someone else is dumb, and obviously not how a reputation system should work.

And the fact that you promote 'flame wars' in the reputation system is laughable at best. Engaging in flame wars anywhere else than the subforum dedicated for that is against the rules, correct me if I'm wrong? Why is it any different from the reputation system?

As far as flaming having uses, then perhaps flaming should be allowed everywhere? I fail to see how berating someone has any use, if you feel the need to get dramatically angry at someone from tension; perhaps it's time to check into anger management.

From: Wizzup?
Well, why won't you post with your original name? Why do you use Anonymous? It's not like you can't use your own name.

Because thats against the forum's etiquette, and it's also technically impossible for KC.

From: Capricorn
How does that in any way relate to the discussion at hand? Sounds like you're just taking hits at Harry the way you worded that.

I don't really care though, because a pretty decent amount of the community thinks the reason they get derepped is bullshit. Getting derepped because your opinion differs from someone else is dumb, and obviously not how a reputation system should work.

And the fact that you promote 'flame wars' in the reputation system is laughable at best. Engaging in flame wars anywhere else than the subforum dedicated for that is against the rules, correct me if I'm wrong? Why is it any different from the reputation system?

As far as flaming having uses, then perhaps flaming should be allowed everywhere? I fail to see how berating someone has any use, if you feel the need to get dramatically angry at someone from tension; perhaps it's time to check into anger management.

I don't think I stated that I think the reputation system serves a flaming purpose. Someone hinted that it leads to flame wars, I simply don't have a problem with it leading to flame wars. As for the rest of your post, do you really expect me to reply to something like ``Perhaps just allow flamewars everywhere''?

From: Capricorn
Getting derepped because your opinion differs from someone else is dumb, and obviously not how a reputation system should work.

I agree with this.

What is the purpose of de-repping ?
Why do we need it ?
If you have a problem with someone sort it out or report them ? Depending on what they have done.
I just don't see any point in it at all tbh.
Rep+ on the other hand is nice to see and makes me happy when I get it.
Why would you create something that only has the intention of being bad/negative ?

What comes to mind now is completely disabling reputation for everyone. It is being abused still. The system doesn't work anyway, some people have a reputation power of 20(!), which allows them to give anyone a reputation ball in about two positive reputations. In other words, the reputation power of a few people who abused the system in the past (by constantly repping each other) far exceeds the power of 10 other individuals.

From: Wizzup?
What comes to mind now is completely disabling reputation for everyone. It is being abused still. The system doesn't work anyway, some people have a reputation power of 20(!), which allows them to give anyone a reputation ball in about two positive reputations. In other words, the reputation power of a few people who abused the system in the past (by constantly repping each other) far exceeds the power of 10 other individuals.

Why not remove the reputation system all together? It would end these kind of argumentative threads, and no more complaining on people being "flame rep'd" or abusing said system.

From: Wizzup?
What comes to mind now is completely disabling reputation for everyone. It is being abused still. The system doesn't work anyway, some people have a reputation power of 20(!), which allows them to give anyone a reputation ball in about two positive reputations. In other words, the reputation power of a few people who abused the system in the past (by constantly repping each other) far exceeds the power of 10 other individuals.

I'm extremely against this.

As for my self if I give some rep to someone for good work I will add "~Home" in the end.

And it feels good to get some reputation of your work / help.

Like I said, I'm against this.

~Home

From: Troll
Poeple should be able to see who is saying what about them :)

There are posts and PMs for that - If you want to rep someone and have them know, you can always just sign ur rep comment..

Needless to say that if you're getting derepped, there mightve just been something wrong in the past and rep doesn't really affect much… so yeh sure, use it as a flame weapon all you want as long as it stays polite flaming.

"I didnt like your post and this idea has been discussed over and over again"

But I'd disagree with fully disabling it.. I still hope it might fulfil some relative goal in the future.

~RM

Regulation does not always benefit society. I'm against removing the system all together, but there is no real benefit to showing people who contribted rep. If youre really that disappointed about de repping then don't check your rep and get it disabled. I agree with Home.

I disabled my reputation, and I still can see if someone gives me reputation. Its nice to know who has repped you, and I'm still in favor of showing the giver.

I don't really care tho I'd like to see the names of people who up repped me =)

Don't think I've been derepped yet.

From: Dgby714
I don't really care tho I'd like to see the names of people who up repped me =)

Don't think I've been derepped yet.

Well we'll have to do something about that, now won't we? :stirthepot:

Anyways, why does this topic keep straying away from the original proposal? I don't think anyone was suggesting removing de-rep or reputation as a whole, the topic is not about that, it's actually a very simple request, show who changed your reputation. No, there's no read advantage nor disadvantage to implanting this, so there's absolutely no reason to argue here, we're just implying it would be a nice feature to have.

I use rep to try and give people that extra push to say "keep going, you're almost there." For those, I don't feel the need to use any tagging of names or the like. Sometimes you just want to give people the idea.

Other times, if its a personal one, I will rep with the ~n2 that many of you have seen.

I like having the option, and for those who are complaining about it, what would change if you did know? You would flame people more? Doesn't sound like a great plan for anyone.

Look at the reason you got a negative rep, if it is for a reason you feel is extremely unjustified, or someone is flaming.. report it! That's why we have the system. Let staff do their jobs. I'm sure there are justifications in place that we are not aware of.

From: Wizzup?
I'm inclined to post my facepalm picture again. I don't know what made you think I'm that much against opening reputation? I just posted my opinion and was curious as to Harry's reasoning.

Sorry, judging by your previous post it appeared as if you were against the idea of making the forum reputation system public.

From: Wizzup?

Do you truly believe this? You need a lecture on psychology.

While it is true that just a forum username does provide the person staring into the screen some anonymity, they'll also take into account their online reputation and would not want to diminish it for such a silly and stupid opinion.

From: Wizzup?
What comes to mind now is completely disabling reputation for everyone.

Or, just disable negative reputation? To be honest, there isn't a real point in it. If a post is against the forum rules, users should report it. It shouldn't really be used as an avenue to express their views on an individuals post and thoughts… anonymously. Things such as that should be done via the PM system (not in the post, to prevent spam).

From: Nava2
I use rep to try and give people that extra push to say "keep going, you're almost there." For those, I don't feel the need to use any tagging of names or the like. Sometimes you just want to give people the idea.

I would say by adding ~n2 at the end would further encourage the individual. They're getting a thumbs up from someone with developer status! That means they've got to of done something good.

public or removed completely

Either keep it the way it is, or show names, but don't remove it. I find it slightly hilarious that harry suddenly cares about being flamed though, considering some of the IRC conversations I've seen.