Thoughts on adding downvote capability?

[RejZoR]

I think the most important would be highlighting the solution post(s) with automated appending of the solution post right below the question post if software allows it. This way, whoever comes to a thread, he doesn't have to scroll through pages lookig for answer, it could be a second post if users mark it as "it worked/solution". Would save tons of time.

 

[hat]

I think users should have a visible overall rating calculated from the ratings they've received, rather than just seeing what individual posts were rated.

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

Will there be a manual for new members?

 

[cadaveca]

I just went into a news post and down-voted all but three posts out of like 40. They were all off-topic and were upvoted. WTF. Some of you guys fail at using this.


I Suggest that if users are upvoting for no reason as seems to be happening, that they get served an infraction, and lose rights to use the system.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I just went into a news post and down-voted all but three posts out of like 40. They were all off-topic and were upvoted. WTF. Some of you guys fail at using this. I Suggest that if users are upvoting for no reason as seems to be happening, that they get served an infraction, and lose rights to use the system.

Can we see to what you are referring? What post was it?

 

[EarthDog]

I just went into a news post and down-voted all but three posts out of like 40. They were all off-topic and were upvoted. WTF. Some of you guys fail at using this.


I Suggest that if users are upvoting for no reason as seems to be happening, that they get served an infraction, and lose rights to use the system.

This is a problem with likes as well... people spam them without reason. Hence why I wanted to limit them - perhaps people will think a little before using them. Now, the same issue makes its way over to the rating system. Fix the root cause, not just the symptoms.

Pretty sure the adage of give them a foot and they take a mile applied here.

I mean, when there are not any consequences, what did you guys expect really? This is the bed that was made.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Or an even better solution, disband the upvotes as well as downvotes and all likes removed. Just allow people to have interaction. If people get too off topic, mods warn them. It’s the relaxed, non-totalitarian atmosphere that drew most people here.

 

[lexluthermiester]

people spam them without reason.

That is an assumption. None of us are mind-readers, thus none of us can know for certain what the reasoning is behind a like/rating. For example, I'm very generous with likes. My reasoning is that if I like, agree with, appreciate or think a comment is useful, it gets a like.

Hence why I wanted to limit them - perhaps people will think a little before using them.

Putting limits on positivity is the same as being negative. Limits on the downrating are needed as they are the most likely aspect to be abused.

Or an even better solution, disband the upvotes as well as downvotes and all likes removed. Just allow people to have interaction.

Can't agree with this either. Many times I use likes to acknowledge what someone has said and let them know such, which is why the current like system is valuable as it shows not only that someone agrees, but also who. In those instances, adding a comment without much more to say is not needed.

 

[rtwjunkie]

That is an assumption. None of us are mind-readers, thus none of us can know for certain what the reasoning is behind a like/rating. For example, I'm very generous with likes. My reasoning is that if I like, agree with, appreciate or think a comment is useful, it gets a like.

Putting limits on positivity is the same as being negative. Limits on the downrating are needed as they are the most likely aspect to be abused.

Can't agree with this either. Many times I use likes to acknowledge what someone has said and let them know such, which is why the current like system is valuable as it shows not only that someone agrees, but also who. In those instances, adding a comment without much more to say is not needed.

I was being facetious, since Cadaveca makes these broad proclamations about up voting being out of control without any context or ability to learn from his corrections. So figured what the heck, “we might as well ditch it all.”

 

[EarthDog]

That is an assumption. None of us are mind-readers, thus none of us can know for certain what the reasoning is behind a like/rating. For example, I'm very generous with likes. My reasoning is that if I like, agree with, appreciate or think a comment is useful, it gets a like.

Putting limits on positivity is the same as being negative. Limits on the downrating are needed as they are the most likely aspect to be abused.

People have willingly admitted as such. We saw the abuse already in this or the others thread doing it out of spite. Dave's example is just another feather in the cap.

I don't believe I use it often. To me, it isn't a 'participation trophy' where if you respond I like it. That isn't to say I don't do it willy nilly sometimes either. BUt they aren't handed out like candy from me.

Putting a limit on likes/positivity is not the same as being negative. Its just making people more conscious on how they spread the love. Instead of willy nilly liking things because they agree or whatever. I don't do it back home as we have a limit, so when something is liked there, it tends to be 'worth it'. Down or up, they will both continue to be abused.

 

[lexluthermiester]

To me, it isn't a 'participation trophy' where if you respond I like it.

But that's your perspective. Not everyone thinks of it the same way.

Putting a limit on likes/positivity is not the same as being negative.

Sorry, it is a proven psychological concept. Limiting a persons ability to be positive is a destructive construct, thus negative.

 

[EarthDog]

I agree, I even said it was my perspective...I didn't say it was anyone else's or a majority. Just how I handle them here. But as always, appreciate reiteration of my point.

To me, it isn't a 'participation trophy' where if you respond I like it.

Well, so far it hasn't destroyed OCF!!! But, is seemingly eroding away at some here.

 

[the54thvoid]

I was being facetious, since Cadaveca makes these broad proclamations about up voting being out of control without any context or ability to learn from his corrections. So figured what the heck, “we might as well ditch it all.”

Oh, I liked your idea and upvoted you a +3.

I'd love to abandon the super mario cart menagerie of systems we have going and just be adults. The whole thing seems out of hand and unnecessary. I'm liking less posts now because my eyes hurt from all the tags and coloured squares. It's like a social media migraine.

I'm not that into the need to be liked or applaud things.

 

[neatfeatguy]

I just went into a news post and down-voted all but three posts out of like 40. They were all off-topic and were upvoted. WTF. Some of you guys fail at using this.


I Suggest that if users are upvoting for no reason as seems to be happening, that they get served an infraction, and lose rights to use the system.

If someone simply clicks on "Like" it immediately applies a +1 to the post. People may not be actually rating with the Rate button and choosing a +1. Multiple likes on a post doesn't seem to change anything, you need to actually click on "Rate" and choose +2 or +3 to increase the positive points applied to the post.

Is the "Like" button supposed to add the +1 to a post? If so, that seems kind of odd. I could simply go around and Like everything and it would all get a +1 if there was no previous rating on the post.

If you changed a lot of +1 posts, this might be the reason why. Someone clicked on "Like" and the post was automatically given a +1 rating.

 

[sneekypeet]

Pretty sure W1zzard tied the +1 and likes together for now. He had reason to do so, server side related if I recall correctly.

 

[Vayra86]

Putting a limit on likes/positivity is not the same as being negative. Its just making people more conscious on how they spread the love. Instead of willy nilly liking things because they agree or whatever. I don't do it back home as we have a limit, so when something is liked there, it tends to be 'worth it'. Down or up, they will both continue to be abused.

I gotta say I like this idea and the thought behind it. It also isn't hard to understand for a newcomer, you just see that you have a number of up/downvotes left for a period of time so you'll deal with it. A little mouseover popup with explanation of it would be sufficient.

@sneekypeet yes what I think W1zz said is he seeds the system with +1's from the likes, to get a baseline/feel for it.

So far I have to say I'm not seeing much reason to complain. Of course people will use the wrong vote for certain posts at times. And whether or not something is deemed off-topic is also not entirely concrete, some people just don't realize if a post truly is on-topic. Its also a matter of intelligence, understanding, and how you feel that day.

Live and let live; let it sit here for a second, let people get accustomed to it. Right now we have a forum where there is a Like and a rating system in place, which is the most confusing bit of it all. When the Like option is entirely removed, people will use the system differently for sure.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I agree, I even said it was my perspective...I didn't say it was anyone else's or a majority. Just how I handle them here. But as always, appreciate reiteration of my point. Well, so far it hasn't destroyed OCF!!! But, is seemingly eroding away at some here.

No offense was intended, of course. Only illustrating a point.

 

[cadaveca]

If someone simply clicks on "Like" it immediately applies a +1 to the post. People may not be actually rating with the Rate button and choosing a +1. Multiple likes on a post doesn't seem to change anything, you need to actually click on "Rate" and choose +2 or +3 to increase the positive points applied to the post.

Is the "Like" button supposed to add the +1 to a post? If so, that seems kind of odd. I could simply go around and Like everything and it would all get a +1 if there was no previous rating on the post.

If you changed a lot of +1 posts, this might be the reason why. Someone clicked on "Like" and the post was automatically given a +1 rating.

I didn't change anything, because I don't have the power to do so... but I do have the same powers everyone else does, and a I down-voted off-topic postings. That's all.

Can we see to what you are referring? What post was it?

To be honest I'd have to switch PCs and check my viewing history. I was sitting at a car dealership waiting for service and was perusing threads while waiting, on my Surface. It's was either an NVidia/Intel/amd thread with most of the posts being about some other brand and how they suck, or don't suck, because they don't do this, or do this. You know, basically the same content in any thread. It makes it hard to remember exactly what's going on.

 

[lexluthermiester]

It's was either an NVidia/Intel/amd thread with most of the posts being about some other brand and how they suck, or don't suck, because they don't do this, or do this.

Yeah, I'm with you on that one. The fanboy stuff is irritating and the back and forth can get tedious. Some of those discussions and can be constructive, but much of the time it's just nonsense.

 

[Deleted member 67555]

Yeah, I'm with you on that one. The fanboy stuff is irritating and the back and forth can get tedious. Some of those discussions and can be constructive, but much of the time it's just nonsense.

That type of nonsense is essential for tech forums.... It's also the reason I stayed in the pits of GN for 3 or so years... It becomes irritating quickly but it is necessary.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Yeah, I'm with you on that one. The fanboy stuff is irritating and the back and forth can get tedious. Some of those discussions and can be constructive, but much of the time it's just nonsense.

Except, we saw nothing, and have no reference other than he didn’t like all the pluses and minuses in some mystery thread. @W1zzard needs to see this.

 

[sneekypeet]

Except, we saw nothing, and have no reference other than he didn’t like all the pluses and minuses in some mystery thread. @W1zzard needs to see this.

Needs to see what exactly? As far as I can tell, Dave is only conveying much of what has been said, but expressed he saw it in a thread. He also explained that to be sure when providing a link, he had to be on another PC to do so. I'm sure there is no "mystery thread", more likely that he is too busy and cannot provide you with detailed information right at this moment. You have been around long enough not to be twisted this tight about someone expressing something. (also, if you read the guidelines, retaliatory behavior, we are trying to curb at TPU)

 

[lexluthermiester]

Except, we saw nothing, and have no reference other than he didn’t like all the pluses and minuses in some mystery thread. @W1zzard needs to see this.

While he didn't cite a specific thread, we've all seen what he was talking about, and in that context he was right. I'd still like to see it too as so understand more fully and I'm betting when he checks his activity, he'll let us know.

 

[Assimilator]

Or an even better solution, disband the upvotes as well as downvotes and all likes removed. Just allow people to have interaction. If people get too off topic, mods warn them. It’s the relaxed, non-totalitarian atmosphere that drew most people here.

What is this, a logical and rational opinion?

I'm in the same boat as you, I honestly don't believe this sudden change has been thought through enough. The laid-back atmosphere that created TPU forums in its current incarnation, is being replaced by something much stricter and the end result is that a LOT of users used to that are going to leave or end up banned. In fact I'm willing to bet that at least a third of the top 50 posters are going to get the chop within the first 3 months, for the simple reason that many of them are guilty of "crimes" like shitposting that were ignored by the previous regime.

So I guess if the objective is to tear down the community that's been built over the past decade, then... good job?

Personally, I like the idea of TPU forums being more structured. But if you wanted it to be that way, you should've made it that way from day one. Changing the rules halfway down the line for reasons that haven't been made clear, seems rather like disassembling a rocket engine to make it more efficient... while it's taking you into orbit.

 

[lexluthermiester]

What is this, a logical and rational opinion?

Really?

In fact I'm willing to bet that at least a third of the top 50 posters are going to get the chop within the first 3 months, for the simple reason that many of them are guilty of "crimes" like shitposting that were ignored by the previous regime.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

So I guess if the objective is to tear down the community that's been built over the past decade, then... good job?

Be realistic, that's not going to happen.

Personally, I like the idea of TPU forums being more structured.

Ok.

But if you wanted it to be that way, you should've made it that way from day one.

If things stayed the same, there would be no need for change. The world is changing and people are changing with it. If TPU wants to stay a welcoming online community it must modify itself to adapt to the changing times.

Changing the rules halfway down the line for reasons that haven't been made clear, seems rather like disassembling a rocket engine to make it more efficient... while it's taking you into orbit.

That statement implies you think TPU staff are accountable to us forum users. They are not. We are guests who do not own this site, nor the forums that are a part of it. What does happen is they ask for our insights. They take on board the ideas they have and sometimes ideas we offer, but only if it seems useful. They experiment with things like this rating system. It's a work in progress. Voicing a concern, a perspective, some experiences, etc, in a constructive way is far more useful than just blasting them with negativity.