I personally think the concept of rating each other is unnecessary & pointless, and it further decreases the moral around here.

Don't feel too bad. You still have more stars than me!

I used to be a 4 stars girl & know I'm at 3 ... Who's the mean bastard who downgraded me?! Why don't you love meee? I'm almost as awesome as Queen Candice

If the number of stars you have affects how you feel to such a degree then there is definitely something else going that is irrelevant to BZ. Seriously, does it REALLY matter what a bunch of random people you barely "know" and have never had an actual interaction with in real life (and probably never will) think of you? If it is yes, then I suggest there be a re-evaulation of things occurring outside of BZ.

^ No worries, you're 5 stars in my eyes (lame line i know ). But on a somewhat serious note. The whole star system...it's not so much to reward good members but a way for spiteful and the crazies (Candice, Lima, Bar..among other minority fans) to get back at those who don't comply with thy holy greatness views of the models I just mentioned in parenthesis. How about a system that rewards those who contribute for the better? Here is a nifty system bellow based on such an idea.

If you look closely at the very bottom of the pic. There is an award bracket. And they base the reward system on medals. Such as Mod of the year, Most Useful Creation, and so on and so forth. We could easily do the same and give medals on: Poster of the year, Content poster of the month, Most Creative Siggy....the ideas are endless with the system and really give incentives in some small fraction I hope to put members on a more proactive cause then to simply star down someone. Hopefully this idea will get more thought

^ Thanks for the wonder suggestion! However I do not think it will work on BZ. In fact I think it will open a whole new can of worms Regardless, we will keep your idea in mind. Thanks again

I was just kidding, i honestly give a shit if i have 5 or 1 star I know who my BZ friends are & that's what matters

I think it's funny how everytime i say something negative about X model i go to 2 or 3 stars. Like seriously, am I not allowed to express my opinion? I don't go around looking for Lima-haters, i think the whole stars thing is unnecessary & lame

^ I wasn't referring to you directly. We were posting about the same time so I could see why you thought I was directing my post at you

It was more for the general BZ community

Good, i was like WUT?

I used to bother myself with this star thing before the forum new layout,now I mostly and barely see it,I can see and feel my ratings from people here,when they give thanx ,when they check on me,when they trust me to tell me anything ,when they understand me,we have so many good members around who can make us feel good without the star rating.

If I were to log into BZ one day and find the star ratings suddenly gone, I can't honestly say I'd shed any tears over it. But as a lifetime member of the four-star club, I guess I would say that.

If the number of stars you have affects how you feel to such a degree then there is definitely something else going that is irrelevant to BZ.

If the number of stars you have affects how you feel to such a degree then there is definitely something else going that is irrelevant to BZ.

^Surely that's just human nature though?...

I never debated whether or not it is human nature. Likability is a huge part of us that is automatic. All I was doing was expressing my thoughts and putting this whole thing into perspective.

I have suggested before about getting rid of the whole system but I was overruled.

I guess that's a small concession. What's infinitely worse is the "reputation" system, in which 'lil' beans are rewarded or taken away. This immediately causes cliche-ish and unnatural posting behaviors among posters.

The ones with the most beans are the ones who are the most political on the forum, rather than the ones who make the highest level of the contribution.

What's the point of the system, anyway? You say that it doesn't have value. So why keep it? What was the reasoning behind its approval?

^ I think people just like to rating each other for whatever reason. Sense of control and democracy? it's fun?

So there wasn't a reason? I've always assumed that the star system was employed as a control apparatus by the forum board.

The individual who who posts unpopular opinions, regardless of its objective worth, would receive a torrent of 1 stars from affected individuals.

Then the individual's allies, which may be many or few, launch a counteroffensive against the enemy attack, and respond with a torrent of 5 stars as to stabilize the situation. If the allied reserves are few, then the status does not regain its original prominence.

So seeing this, the individual ceases to post provocative material and thus the world is once again at peace with all.

I guess that's a small concession. What's infinitely worse is the "reputation" system, in which 'lil' beans are rewarded or taken away. This immediately causes cliche-ish and unnatural posting behaviors among posters.

The ones with the most beans are the ones who are the most political on the forum, rather than the ones who make the highest level of the contribution.