The majority of users wanted a system where individual posts were voted on rather than directly voting on users.
The majority of users wanted a system where voting was not enabled in off-topic forums such as The Lounge and Comments, Suggestions and Ideas.
The majority of users wanted a system where there was a penalty for down-voting to discourage pointless down-votes.
All of these changes were implemented, and I think they made for great improvements to the system.
Now, that being said we will not
be removing the reputation system. Even the older, significantly more flawed system resulted in a marked improvement in the site, helping both to discourage problem content as well as highlighting the most helpful users.
We are however absolutely willing to take suggestions and ideas for how to improve the system.
Let's be brutally honest though. You're not interested in improving the system, and most of your complaints about the system are based on flawed assumptions. You're a spoilt kid who is upset that you've been down-voted for consistently foolish behaviour.
Your reputation is not simply bad luck, it's the result of your own behaviour. You have been consistently
voted down to the extent that even whilst gaining a free +1 for each day you log in you're ranked #203039. It takes more -- significantly more -- than 100 negative votes to get a reputation as low as yours. You're consistently accused of trolling, not by the same people repeatedly, but by different
users each time. Another major contribution to your negative reputation is the fact that you consistently down-vote anyone you dislike or who's opinion you disagree with, even if they're trying to help you or are simply pointing out facts, costing you -1 point to your own reputation each time.
Your reputation is completely deserved, and I would suggest that if people take you
less seriously based on your reputation then that's really a glowing commendation for the system rather than some black mark against it.
I'll briefly respond to some specifics from your posts though:
You can get a positive reputation just from simply giving others a positive reputation.
This means that everyone will have a positive reputation and it means that reputation doesn't actually mean anything.
This is to encourage participation by voting, and also allows an opportunity for those who have been down-voted to restore their reputation. There's also a limit on how many points can be gained in this way.
Rather than meaning that reputation doesn't mean anything, it makes it even more impressive that your reputation is so low in spite of the fact that any up-voting helps to balance it out.
if you happen to have the bad luck to start off with a bad reputation then it's impossible to get a good reputation.
No one is forced to start off with a bad reputation due to bad luck. Everyone
starts with the same
gets +100 points for free to begin with. Everyone
earns +1 free reputation point each day they log in, so that all your have to do to cancel out a down-vote is to log in on four separate days. Unless you're being consistently
down-voted it's actually pretty easy to recover from damage to your reputation score.
Because other users can downvote your posts without getting a penalty themselves.
As has already been pointed out, this isn't correct. In order to discourage pointless or petty down-voting we made it cost a point from your own reputation to down-vote someone else.
Also if a user with negative rep downvotes someone else then the target doesnt actually get negative rep.
You need to have a reputation lower than 0 -- that is, you must have lost at least
100 points, plus any additional ones you have earned -- for this to apply, and your votes would begin to have an effect again if your reputation were raised above 0 again. Up-voting can earn your points back towards this end. Logging in also helps earn your points back.
easy to avoid being effected that you're the only
regularly active user it applies to, and again, I think it's a good thing; as mentioned above, you often down-vote people who are trying to help you, and I think most people who agree that it's a good thing that your votes don't effect their reputations.
and the following im not 100% sure off but negative rep users get bigger negative hits every time.
This is incorrect.
there was a female moderator, i think she is the one who made this system.
one of my warnings on this forum is because I started off a reply with "you are wrong" and then I followed it up with a lengthy paragraph with my arguements and reasoning why I believe he was wrong.
I can see your warning history, and this isn't accurate.
and sometimes i just upvote randomly without reading their posts just so i can get a few positive reps.
Again, you admit to cheating the system and you still
have one of the lowest reputations around.
I always back up what I say with reasoning,sense and logic and sometimes even facts.
Unfortunately, your sense of "reasoning, sense and logic" is twisted enough that you're often completely incorrect and quite often somehow completely ignorant of the realities of the industry and completely unwilling to listen to those who try to better inform you. It's a pretty regular occurrence that a knowledgeable member tells you some fact about how things are normally done and you simply stick your head in the sand and insist it isn't true.
If anyone has any genuine
feedback they'd like to offer on the system, we're more than happy to hear it! We know it isn't perfect, and we will continue to work on improvements.
Honestly, the reputation system isn't perfect and we'd like to continue improving it to make the absolute best system we possibly can. It will likely never be perfect for everyone, but with continued work I'm sure we can make something that keeps the majority of users happy, provides useful information, and isn't overly intrusive for those who would prefer to simply ignore it.