Hello! I'm making this thread due to an influx of staff removing reputation that they deem invalid in mass amounts from people. I'd like to start off by saying that I am not against staff removing reputation such as, "Vouch, cool dude" or "Nice guy recommended dealing with him." What I am against, is removing reputation that was given from a banned member and the removal of reputation from members who didn't give valid proof. I recall Justis once saying something along the lines of reputation from banned members "is not valid." This was in response to a thread about deleting negative reputation from a banned member. I agree with this as a negative opinion from someone banned doesn't matter because they clearly didn't follow the rules, yet removing positive reputation does not make sense. For example, the user RTG was banned for exiting scamming, yet prior to this he had completed many successful deals. If he legitimately sold something like a MC account or Bitcoin to a user and the deal went well, then why does the user who bought the item not get credit for it being successful transaction? Again, if the banned member left a positive reputation that isn't high quality for reputation, then I'm for removing it. It just doesn't makes sense to take away reputation from a user who has done a successful deal. Next, removing reputation due to it not having sufficient proof should not be removed. While I am not the biggest fan of having to upload a file every time I add reputation, it does add another layer reputation by proving it was valid. The way I believe this should be fixed is by adding a rule that has 3-5 warning points as a punishment for not providing sufficient proof. If a user doesn't do so, why should the user getting the reputation be punished? Should we have to beg for them to add proper proof? If staff enforces warning points instead of just removing the reputation, users will be forced to add valid proof or they will end up eventually getting banned. Anyways, these are my thoughts on the current reputation situation. Feel free to leave your thoughts below. EDIT: You should not be given warning points for reputations before this potential rule is enforced, rather after. EDIT 2: I furthered my idea in a post below.