Thoughts on adding downvote capability?

[W1zzard]

Quick update, making good progress with the addon, this is what I have so far.

Whether we will have a 0 option is undecided, also whether public can view the votes like in the tooltip, or just the names, or not at all

I think it's probable that we will use existing "like" data to seed the addon with +1 votes

 

[dj-electric]

Not a huge fan of any comment rating system of any kind actually.
I don't like like-whoring, nor downvote fanatics.

We're all here to inform and get informed, consume information and celebrate science and technology.
Spam and toxicity should be treated by a normal set of rules. Warnings, mutes etc.

I get away from Reddit, facebook, imgur and other rating-obsessed sites just to come here to swim in a pool of sanity (mostly)

 

[jsfitz54]

the more people will understand how it works and fall in line.

Thanks for making me re-read your post a second time.
I find this part of what you say as problematic. Basically you want to stifle those you personally find undesirable.
This does become a personal matter for all those voting.
I don't want this place to evolve in that manner.
That's herd mentality.

Edit:
Trying to find: Stanley Milgram
Who is that psychologist (test) who said "you must press the button"? (The one that delivers the electric shock.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

 

[Vayra86]

Thanks for making me re-read your post a second time.
I find this part of what you say as problematic. Basically you want to stifle those you personally find undesirable.
This does become a personal matter for all those voting.
I don't want this place to evolve in that manner.
That's herd mentality.

Edit:
Trying to find: Stanley Milgram
Who is that psychologist (test) who said "you must press the button"? (The one that delivers the electric shock.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Falling in line of the forum guidelines and rules hardly qualifies as herd mentality (which I probably hate as much as you seem to do) in my view, I'd say it falls under 'etiquette'.

Quick update, making good progress with the addon, this is what I have so far.

Whether we will have a 0 option is undecided, also whether public can view the votes like in the tooltip, or just the names, or not at all

I think it's probable that we will use existing "like" data to seed the addon with +1 votes

Looks good (and shamelessly copied, but I won't tell anyone ) - don't forget about adding a report button + topic for mismoderation so people can 'appeal'... It will provide people with a specific place to voice concerns instead of making you lock countless topics about it, and will probably ease the pain for those who disagree with the system. About visibility of people with their scores... choice is yours of course but I would strongly advise against it, because it goes against the intent of the system (moderating based on content not people).

 

[cucker tarlson]

So,slowly and carefully, what content qualifies for that "-" button ?

 

[neatfeatguy]

So,slowly and carefully, what content qualifies for that "-" button ?

All of it. Anything with non proper english, and punctuation! Me am going to put a negative on every one of them posts. Your post, my post, there post. All of them!

In all seriousness, probably those that are horribly off topic or trying to derail.

 

[Totally]

I would be against, downvote sys was ruining Dailytech before the split from Anandtech. There were a few commenters where if you didn't see eye to eye or simply disagree with the dissenting comments were downvoted to oblivion regardless of how valid their point or stance was on the subject. God forbid anyone say anything negative about Steve Jobs, Iphone, or Apple. Finally there were some individuals who seemed that their sole purpose was to collect as many negative votes as possible by any means.

 

[Franzen4Real]

I would vote for no down votes and a more strict rule set and moderation. I think there are too many comments that cross the line towards other members and TPU staff. My opinion is remove the problem instead of mask the problem. Users will without a doubt up/down vote another comment about a particular brand that does not align with their favorite brands, no matter if the original comment has actual merit or not. Down voting legitimate comments with good intentions will probably result in that person not commenting again in the future. I agree with @lynx29 above, in that we should always encourage positivity.

 

[Vayra86]

So,slowly and carefully, what content qualifies for that "-" button ?

By the official standard set for it at the source:
-1 / Flamebait, troll or insult of another user
0 / Off-topic
+1 / On-topic
+2 / Informative (adds new information to the topic)
+3 / Spotlight (adds vital information to the topic)

This makes it very easy to enforce, its really quite black and white and if mods want to detect people downvoting for no reason, its pretty simple. The only two scores you can really have a debate on are +2 and +3, and if we're debating thát... its half the battle won really

 

[Totally]

By the official standard set for it at the source:
-1 / Flamebait, troll or insult of another user
0 / Off-topic
+1 / On-topic
+2 / Informative (adds new information to the topic)
+3 / Spotlight (adds vital information to the topic)

This makes it very easy to enforce, its really quite black and white and if mods want to detect people downvoting for no reason, its pretty simple

How is it going to handle the people who for whatever instead see:

-1 / Doesn't agree with/ Doesn't like person/ Contains insignificant typo/ Didn't use Oxford comma
0 / Don't care for content of post
+1 / Find post is pleasing to the eyes
+2 / Agrees with
+3 / BFF/ really agrees with

If these ratings are supposed to be anonymous and also a concregate score how are mods at a glance supposed to know that people are following the laid out guidlines

 

[Vayra86]

How is it going to handle the people who for whatever instead see:

-1 / Doesn't agree with /Doesn't like person
0 / Don't care for content of post
+1 / Find post is pleasing to the eyes
+2 / Agrees with
+3 / BFF/ really agrees with

They are going to be nuanced/nullified by the force of numbers. You see, its a median score, so even if 3 people give a +1, 3 people give a 0 and one dude gives out a +3, the median will be below 2. Users will also 'counter mod' when they see a score that feels unjust: for example, I could give out a +2 for something that was downvoted to compensate. Even though it is not entirely how the system was designed, effectively, it works amazingly well as a user-based correction mechanism.

Same with that one guy downvoting everything: he won't even be noticed in the median score. You can only give 1 minus, a single +1 will already bump the post up to a normal level. All you need then is one other user who also considers the post 'on topic' and the score is accurate again. Again: its designed to marginalize the negativity in every way. The only effective approach to combating the troll is by not giving it attention.

Now, on top of that, the system on Tweakers.net is such that if I post comments that earn '+3 Spotlights' (and keep them after 48 hours, mind you) I also earn a number of 'Boost' tickets. I can use these to make my scoring on a post count for two or more of the same scores. This way, the users that contribute a lot also gain a stronger moderation status.

 

[cucker tarlson]

I can't remember how many times people called me a troll when they just disagreed with what I was saying.

This is going to trun out real bad.

 

[Vayra86]

I can't remember how many times people called me a troll when they just disagreed with what I was saying.

This is going to trun out real bad.

So let's go into the hypothetical situation then.

Say you post something that two people disagree with, but score as -1. You only need 2 other people who think you're on-topic to neutralize that. And if there is ONE person who fully agrees with you and thinks your post is valuable in some way, you're already back to a +1.

And what if those people don't turn up? Then you complain to a mod, they correct the rating, done. In the meantime, the users downvoting you get into the picture because a mod had to step in to counteract their behaviour. If they keep repeating that, they could lose the ability to rate. The really big win here is that mods get a very nice view on who's detrimental to the atmosphere and who is not, whereas right now its down to them chalking up infractions manually.

 

[EarthDog]

And what if those people don't turn up? Then you complain to a mod, they correct the rating, done.

And therein lay a fundamental flaw with this system... the people aren't mature enough to handle it, and you need moderator intervention to correct it. Why add an additional layer like this? Just be allowed to moderate!!!

whereas right now its down to them chalking up infractions manually.

How it should be. Report bad posts, do something (or not) about it.

There are so many other leaks in the boat which need more attention than this!!!

 

[Vayra86]

And therein lay a fundamental flaw with this system... the people aren't mature enough to handle it, and you need moderator intervention to correct it. Why add an additional layer like this? Just be allowed to moderate!!!

How it should be. Report bad posts, do something (or not) about it.

There are so many other leaks in the boat which need more attention than this!!!

What clearly has not occurred to you is the idea that our mods are actually having a very hard time treading that fine line between good moderation and being too soft, and this system is capable of guiding them in a big way. Nobody EVER said this could work without any moderation. The point is catching the outliers fast and effectively while promoting a positive attitude. Now, I will agree 100% that singling out 'low quality post' on its own is clearly not enough or even effective, but that is not what this is.

One thing I applaud on TPU in terms of moderation is the degree of freedom of speech within topics. It really has to turn bad for a mod to step in and even then they are lenient. This is as much a blessing as a curse in my view.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Let's just have "rated topics" then. Some discussions,which have the potential to be inflammatory, do have the system. Others don't. We don't need this system for 90% of the threads here.

 

[Vayra86]

Let's just have "rated topics" then. Some discussions,which have the potential to be inflammatory, do have the system. Others don't. We don't need this system for 90% of the threads here.

Agreed - it is most useful under the news section - and perhaps ANY brand related/specific content on the forum.

EDIT: gonna stop posting here now because I'm becoming a chat bot. If you have questions, find my posts in this topic and the answer will likely be in there.

@W1zzard

 

[EarthDog]

Clearly? heh...

A mod, or two, had suggested in this, or the other thread, they were handcuffed and directed/suggested to 'be nice' from the powers that be. Take those handcuffs off and I believe things settle down....without software coding, without additional moderator intervention. I don't understand why it was decided to change the wheel first instead of letting the staff actually moderate (I dont have to of course, its just curious to me).

I don't think the readership can guide them very well without a lot of undue effort from staff to sort through it all... which is a problem (to me). I mean let's get to moderating and see what that does ! Instead, the man behind the curtain is spending time coding a solution that many don't seem to want or think will work. Do I have the right answer? Gosh no, but from what we have seen moderators say and thank, I just don't think this is a solution.

 

[dorsetknob]

Still think an extra Link next to Report (Saying) Low Quality Post would be simplier
Nothing is added to thread so there is no indication for other people ( Sheepie's ) to follow
Only mods get Flagged and see (some one is Concerned)
mods then can determine if flagged concern merit's further Action ( as needed)
Its Simple and no ratings on post to upset people

 

[HTC]

I've been only reading up to this point and i have to say i'm not too much into downvoting posts but this system as proposed by @Vayra86 seems good enough to @ least give it the benefit of the doubt.

I'd suggest to @W1zzard to adopt a system such as this for ... say ... 2 weeks on a trial basis, and then decide if it's worth it to continue using it from then on.

 

[jsfitz54]

I just don't think this is a solution.

I'm not disagreeing but on the other hand just go ahead and implement the new system.

In 6 months you will know if it's working and how much extra effort has to be made behind the curtains.

Edit: Can you get University funding for the experiment? Or Private funding?

 

[Vya Domus]

What stops me from downvoting everything written by someone just because I don't like them and buddy up with others to do the same ?

Who is to say it wont come down to anything else other than just that ?

 

[Vayra86]

What stops me from downvoting everything written by someone just because I don't like them and buddy up with others to do the same ?

Who is to say it wont come down to anything else other than just that ?

(I did say I'd stop posting... damn you)

If you do this you will be identified within the week, because you will structurally show to be -1 scoring posts together with a specific group of people. This does require linking up the data on the backend, which may take some querying (which is a couple of hour's work building one). You make it seem as though this will be rampant, but I can tell you that on Tweakers.net, it really is not, in fact I have never really detected this except for a short period of time, like under one specific news article.

Well , it will be obvious , clearly. But who cares ?

Is that a rhetorical or an honest question? If honest... this is how mods can mod effectively...

 

[Vya Domus]

If you do this you will be identified within the week, because you will structurally show to be -1 scoring posts together with a specific group of people.

Well , it will be obvious , clearly. But who cares ?

 

[dorsetknob]

Edit: Can you get University funding for the experiment?

@W1zzard Could apply for an EU Research Grant on Human behavior Study

Also no one has raised the potential issue of post Rating bots (script kiddies will be script prats)

Edit could it be hard coded into Reply box ???? low Quality Post that may cause people to reconsider before they post