I can't make one anonymous and not the other, and that will create a problem (and a small one, not the biggest). I gave you guys a poll to decide if we should lift the word filter, and I went ahead and did it. Since then, people have been cussing each other out, and I've deleted a few posts that shouldn't have been made. This isn't an option. There are two sites I know of that are ruined partially because of negative reps. They go around and neg-rep each other just because of who that person is (ex. negative reps for every post Sacha makes), and it's really not your call to do something like that. If you agree with a post, there isn't much more to add to a discussion. If you disagree, there's a TON you can add. There's nothing wrong with what we are doing right now. Sometimes, I have to make the decisions, despite how the community feels. How many people wanted Diesel unbanned the first time he was tossed? Plenty, and it happened. The second time? Plenty. Eventually, people found out he didn't give a damn about the site, that he had multiple accounts, that he was posting under different (and fake) Facebook and Twitter names, threatening members and athletes. I would rather just eliminate reputation points altogether, than to add a negative rep. It doesn't matter what certain members promise...3-4 guys won't be speaking for the entire community, and saying the system won't be abused is like me saying members will never up and leave the site.