My first post on the subject, was misread or misunderstood. I don't understand why the difficulty in getting a straightforward answer:
Quote " Perhaps, though, on reflection, it would help to prevent abuse if approvers also, as well as disapprovers, had to give a reason for approving? "
At the moment, a postive reputation can be given, without comment. A negative reputation , as I have repeated, must have a comment. Any reader can see that reputations have been built up by several members on "likeability" rather than quality of post. But maybe this is the intention?