 |
|
|
UER Store
|
|
order your copy of Access All Areas today!
|
|
|
|
Activity
|
|
816 online
Server Time:
2024-05-07 00:00:25
|
|
|
 Chikote
 
This member has been banned
I R NO SPEL RITE
 |  | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 20 on 1/10/2004 11:13 AM >
|  | | | Posted by The Hitman's Daughter
Posted by Chikote
Well at least we won't end up with spammy responses like "good point" "I disagree".
Stuff like that adds no content, and should be kept off the boards, so I totally agree that a rating system lets people get it out of their system.
|
spammy responses like that matter, though. So you're right, the rating system allows people to agree/disagree without having to fill up the threads with "yeah!" "cool" "haha"...
For example: when someone tells me a picture i posted was interesting, or that they liked my idea, etc, i want to post a thank-you.. But the thank-you's usually get gobbled up by mods because they "have no content", which in turn makes me look like a snob. Maybe this will help.
I know i'm not the only one who has to make up long paragraphs of topic-relevant babble to ensure the post won't be deleted, when all you really want to do is acknowledge somebody with a "yeah!"
|
The last forum I went on actually allowed that sort of posting, but only if it added to the thread. For instance, if you posted some art and someone else said "Great work", you would be allowed to say "Thankyou". But if someone posted "I don't like it", it would be deleted. Negative opinions and contributions were thought to be of less importance, unless you backed them up with reasons or evidence.
Which I found quite helpful. Especially in sections of the forum where lots of people posted lots of art or other media they wanted comments on.
Dear Chasey Lain, I wrote to explain, I'm your biggest fan, I just wanted to ask; Could I eat your ass? Write back as soon as you can. |
|
punkboy_jerm
  
Location: Montreal
Gender: Male
| |  | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 21 on 1/10/2004 4:39 PM >
|  | | | I just say we all participate by not participating...
true...it helps gt rid of useless posts, which is a good thing but I think most of use remember what happened last time?!?
Portfolio and blog:
http://www.ibrokeup.net
http://www.escapeisathand.com |
|
Chikote
This member has been banned
I R NO SPEL RITE
| | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 22 on 1/10/2004 4:50 PM >
| | | | Posted by punkboy_jerm
I just say we all participate by not participating...
true...it helps gt rid of useless posts, which is a good thing but I think most of use remember what happened last time?!?
|
I think the ratings system will be biased, but I don't care about that. Really, I appreciate it when people rate my posting highly, but it doesn't really affect me. If everyone hates what I say and puts low ratings on my posts, I personally feel that is alot more constructive that if people ranted at each other.
The rating system allows you to vent your feelings while at the same time saving on arguments and spam. Over all it is quite beneficial, and has alot of advantages. Really people who have arguments over the ratings system are missing the point of it. Instead of arguing with someone, give their post a low rating. He'll soon see that everybody disagree's with him.
Dear Chasey Lain, I wrote to explain, I'm your biggest fan, I just wanted to ask; Could I eat your ass? Write back as soon as you can. |
|
punkboy_jerm
Location: Montreal
Gender: Male
| | | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 23 on 1/10/2004 4:54 PM >
| | | | Posted by Chikote
Instead of arguing with someone, give their post a low rating. He'll soon see that everybody disagree's with him.
|
this is a forum. In a forum we are sopposed to have open dialog...
I remember how slow the forum got last time because so many people left!
oh and mods...maybe this should be moved to "other"? 
Portfolio and blog:
http://www.ibrokeup.net
http://www.escapeisathand.com |
|
Chikote
This member has been banned
I R NO SPEL RITE
| | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 24 on 1/10/2004 7:18 PM >
| | | | Posted by punkboy_jerm
oh and mods...maybe this should be moved to "other"?
|
Yeah I was wondering what this thread was doing in the main forum too.
In any case, open dialogue only goes so far. Or more precisely, it is only helpful to a certain extent. We aren't angst ridden teenagers that feel we need to express ourselves at every twist and turn, but then again we aren't opinionless either.
I think a healthy balance is always a good thing. If you feel you will only be inclined to respond with flaming, or ranting, just rate the offending post low, but if you feel you genuinely need to put across some negative opinions, then go ahead and post it.
In other words, if someone needs to know that they are being a dick, or need to sort out their perspective of things, then there is only one way to show them, and that is not through rating. But if you just want to tell someone that you think they are stuck up themselves, rating their post would be the best option.
I'm not trying to dispute what you say though, punkboy, I'm just trying to rephrase my point so that you get what I really mean. When used correctly, the rating system saves a whole lot of flaming, which makes space for genuine comments. Instead of deleting someones post and saying in the pm "stop flaming", a moderator might suggest that the offending user rate the post.
I've never actually been in a situation where the posts were rated, however, so I can't claim that what I am talking about here works. I'm only relaying what I percieve to be obvious advantages.
Dear Chasey Lain, I wrote to explain, I'm your biggest fan, I just wanted to ask; Could I eat your ass? Write back as soon as you can. |
|
Capone
Location: London, Ontario
Gender: Male
UEL
| | | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 25 on 1/10/2004 7:32 PM >
|  | | | My opinion stands the same as the first time this was put into place: get rid of it. If you want my reasons, go search for the old thread(s) 
0 of 1000 people thought this was a good post
So there I was, in this creepy old hallway... |
|
Stewie
   
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Gender: Male
kill your idols
| | | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 26 on 1/10/2004 7:48 PM >
| | | | Whats the point? It doesnt add up to pretty little stars like before. Man, I had -27 last time. I think thats a damn good acheivement. That was some good times, I beat Smith good I tells ya. So, can we have the rating stars back, puwease?
> The hierarchy of power dictates that the person with the most power does the least amount of work and retains the highest benefit. |
|
Bizzybear
Nobler Donor
Location: Lake George, New York
Gender: Female
Doesn't play well with others
| | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 27 on 1/10/2004 9:47 PM >
| | | | I don't feel that anyone is really expressing anything by clicking yes/no. Noone will know what way anyone voted. If I think someone is a dipshit and I disagree with their post or think it is a bad post, I want them to know I disagree with it and why. I don't want to just be a percentage of people who feel a certain way.
Also, what if someone has some kind of crazy vendetta against a person or people. They could just go around and click no, even if it is a good post. It makes no sense why we are having this option.
http://sybilsden.com/bizzybear/main.html[/ur |
|
Macsbug
Noble Donor
Location: St. Paul, MN
Gender: Male
Safety First!
| |  | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 28 on 1/10/2004 10:19 PM >
| | | | Well a problem I see is that what is the point?
I mean if it is to show somebody that there posts arent really usefull, it doesnt do anything, becouse I dont think anybody really keeps track of, and rereads their previous posts.
If the point is to help other people decide how usefull/worthwhile a post is worth reading, I dont care what people vote, I'm still going to read every post.
But it is not nagging, nor does it mess with the stars, so I dont really care that much, just fail to see the point.
"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it." |
|
SPEK Photo
Location: Where you were not.
"Chere cachère!"
| | | Re: ... Huh?
<Reply # 29 on 1/11/2004 1:06 AM >
| | | | Posted by SPEK
!@#$%?&*()
VOTE NO FOR THIS POSTING.
|
Hey! I said VOTE NO FOR THIS POSTING... I mean MY posting, this one!
9 out of 10 voted good! .... I said vote no, not yes!
[last edit 1/11/2004 1:06 AM by SPEK Photo - edited 1 times]
Pour fins d'archives.
WWW.EXPLORATIONURBAINE.CA |
|
'Dukes
Noble Donor
Gender: Male
At least someone llikes me
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 30 on 1/11/2004 9:09 PM >
| | | | I don't see the point either. I mean fine, you can basically tell a moron like Intalex he's a jerk by clicking "bad post", but what's it ultimately mean, that he will be "expelled"?
Probably not.
What's that line from Goodfellas where Tommy says something in Italian and Hendri says "what's that mean" and Tommy replies (paraphrasing) "He's a jerk and he knows it, he's content to be a jerk"
Some people are "content to be a jerk" and there's not much you can do about it.
I got your tour winner right here pussies, at least he'd crash out trying. |
|
Avatar-X
 
Alpha Husky
Location: West Coast
Gender: Male
yay!
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 31 on 1/11/2004 9:15 PM >
| | | | well, i figured the ratings system would be a good way to look for new moderators. see the general opinion that people have of said person.
huskies - such fluff. |
|
F A S T
Location: Oakland, CA
Gender: Male
Coastal Wind
| | | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 32 on 1/11/2004 9:50 PM >
| | | | Why can't there be a poll for the ratings system?
I think people who are already going to SPAM don't give a damn what their rating is. I also think the qualities that should exist in moderators aren't all found in a favorable rating. In fact, it could be very deceptive.
I vote for a poll to determine this.
UEXplorer
F A S T |
|
Macsbug
Noble Donor
Location: St. Paul, MN
Gender: Male
Safety First!
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 33 on 1/11/2004 9:57 PM >
| | | | Posted by UEXplorer
I think people who are already going to SPAM don't give a damn what their rating is. I also think the qualities that should exist in moderators aren't all found in a favorable rating. In fact, it could be very deceptive.
|
Thats what I wanted to say too, I just couldnt word it right.
I think new mods should be chosen by Av and the other mods based on their merits, not votes recieved.
[last edit 1/11/2004 9:57 PM by Macsbug - edited 1 times]
"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it." |
|
Avatar-X
Alpha Husky
Location: West Coast
Gender: Male
yay!
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 34 on 1/11/2004 10:56 PM >
| | | | if you don't like the rating system, don't use it.
we are not going to choose mods based solely on ratings. but, ratings may be used to narrow down a large group of people into a smaller one. if someone has a negative rating but a high postcount, they clearly post a lot of bad posts.
i like the idea of considering the ratings system as a way to say "i didn't like this post" and hopefully helping the original poster determine how to make every post a good post.
huskies - such fluff. |
|
Macsbug
Noble Donor
Location: St. Paul, MN
Gender: Male
Safety First!
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 35 on 1/11/2004 11:09 PM >
| | | | Posted by Avatar-X
if you don't like the rating system, don't use it.
we are not going to choose mods based solely on ratings. but, ratings may be used to narrow down a large group of people into a smaller one. if someone has a negative rating but a high postcount, they clearly post a lot of bad posts.
i like the idea of considering the ratings system as a way to say "i didn't like this post" and hopefully helping the original poster determine how to make every post a good post.
|
I am not going to use it becouse I dont personally go back to check what people voted for my posts, and I am not going to waste time voting for whatever I disagreee/agree with if I dont believe it will be read by the original poster. But to each his own I guess.
Ok, just as long as you arent trying to pick mods almost solely off of ratings, that was my problem with you using it to pick mods.
[last edit 1/11/2004 11:10 PM by Macsbug - edited 1 times]
"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it." |
|
kowalski
| | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 36 on 1/11/2004 11:53 PM >
|  | | | Posted by Avatar-X
if you don't like the rating system, don't use it.
we are not going to choose mods based solely on ratings. but, ratings may be used to narrow down a large group of people into a smaller one. if someone has a negative rating but a high postcount, they clearly post a lot of bad posts.
|
Are you really telling me that you would *ever* choose a mod you didn't know so well as to make their rating redundant?
Give us a break, and stop inventing reasons for this thing after the fact. It seems that once again, most of the people on these forums don't see any good reason for having the thing.
Binary feedback is not constructive feedback. Binary feedback doesn't tell a user what is wrong with their post, it just tells them that someone didn't like it. If you have a problem with something that someone posts, you should tell them, either in the thread if it's a problem with the content, or by private mail, if it's a tremendously-pressing problem with the way they presented what they said.
People who make lots of short, uncompelling posts aren't going to care that people rate them badly. People who use the board in this manner are never going to be in the running for moderator status. And people that make lots of these posts don't hurt the forums or the conversation either.
Go to a party. Have a conversation with five or six people. Many of them may contribute little more than some laughter and a couple witty one-liners. Same thing with all the other conversation cliques around the room. So you think, these people are useless, I should get rid of them. So you throw all of them out. Now you have a handful of people left in the room. One of two things will happen now:
a) the party will have died. they may not have been contributing valuable/entertaining information on a frequent basis, but their presence kept things going.
b) the same pattern will repeat itself in your smaller group, even if some of these people were talking others' ears off before, now they will sit back and listen and laugh and make mostly-irrelevant jokes.
As I argued a few months ago, this system is unnecessary, it is unwelcome, and it is essentially dehumanizing and demeaning. There is no crisis here that this system responds to, and no minor problems that it tries to answer that cannot be better addressed through real human feedback. This is a community for conversation and collective discovery, not an encyclopedia. When you're having a conversation with people, you don't rate them. So why should we want or be encouraged to do so here?
[last edit 1/11/2004 11:55 PM by kowalski - edited 1 times]
|
|
'Dukes
Noble Donor
Gender: Male
At least someone llikes me
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 37 on 1/12/2004 12:57 AM >
| | | | Av, I can understand that this is a good way to find moderators, and I've noticed some new ones in the past couple of days, but you know damn well, that the easiest way to avoid a bad post is to avoid ANY discussion of politics and triangulate yourself to the middle. That doesn't make a good moderator, it just makes someone with no guts. On the other hand, someone willing to take the middle of the road insults noone, so maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong.
Intalex could engineer his way into all "good" posts but the person proved to be a pile of ...well something.
I got your tour winner right here pussies, at least he'd crash out trying. |
|
Avatar-X
Alpha Husky
Location: West Coast
Gender: Male
yay!
| | | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 38 on 1/12/2004 1:41 AM >
| | | | I re-iterate: Don't like the ratings system? Don't use it. The method by which the administation here chooses moderators is for us to decide.
The ratings system does not seek to eliminate posts containing nothing but laughs or bad additions, like kowalski's party example. Rather, I'm trying to make the focus, the drive, on this board move from 'make as many posts as you can' to 'make GOOD, informative posts'.
One of the main problems with practically every board is that the stars and rating levels are assigned based on postcount. More posts = more stars = a higher feeling of recognition. In trying this ratings system, I'm hoping it will encourage people to make GOOD posts, as opposed to bad ones.
Now, by GOOD posts, I mean well-written, clearly worded posts that offer a new line of thinking, bring new facts or a new point of view to the discussion, etc etc. Even a post that goes against the general concensus can be a good post.
huskies - such fluff. |
|
kowalski
| | Re: New Ratings System
<Reply # 39 on 1/12/2004 1:45 AM >
| | | | And then, like I said months ago, in elementary school we got stars on the wall when we did good things or succeeded in getting our assignments done on time. For the good, enthusiastic kids, the stars didn't change anything. For the trouble makers and disinterested crowd, the stars didn't change anything. Do you really think we're so dumb that the lure of stars makes any difference to how we post? Or, if this is really behind the behaviour of high-chaff posters, why don't you just get rid of them all together? Instead of indexing them to post-count or post-rating, eliminate them. Problem solved.
As you suggest we don't use it if we don't like it, would you please be so kind as to give us the option of hiding it? Thank you.
|
|
|
|
All content and images copyright © 2002-2024 UER.CA and respective creators. Graphical Design by Crossfire.
To contact webmaster, or click to email with problems or other questions about this site:
UER CONTACT
View Terms of Service |
View Privacy Policy |
Server colocation provided by Beanfield
This page was generated for you in 61 milliseconds. Since June 23, 2002, a total of 740864267 pages have been generated.
|
|
