my stance on downvoting, reporting, etc...
-
Since I actually work at my office, I know I'm not exactly the most active member out there. But here's a rant for you guys: Even if I find Dalek Dave an arrogant, uptight, posh, ultra-right extremist " :rolleyes: ", I would never downvote, let alone report him. The downvote thing is clearly meant for spam and idiots who post in the wrong forum, if it gets abused it will lose it's power. General caveman behavior like using pejorative terms, 'extreme' anti-intellectualism and celebrating events where people got tortured and murdered (and/or disputing whether they have happened even though it's sufficiently documented) may be an acceptable reasons to downvote. Disagreeing with someones opinion, sense of humor, political color, religion, or just not liking someone personally should never be a reason. And I know points are not important, etc... but it's the principle: -> I think it's safe to say that most of you here don't like the idea of ACTA, SOPA or PIPA. Guess what; playing internet thought police is taking an even worse stance than either of these bills ever could potentially do to you. You can't want a world to go in one direction, while all you do is going in the exact opposite direction. Your actions matter, however small they may appear. It's called leading by example.
Giraffes are not real.
I agree that it loses its power. I have made some unpopular, not offensive, statements lately and someone has been marking all of my stuff as SPAM, which is worse than down voting. But yes, there are some people on here that abuse their rights and I guess they get a power trip because this is the only power they have in their life. I don't care about rep points either but too many people are abusing the system and therefore it is losing its power. The reputation points are losing their reputation.
-
Since I actually work at my office, I know I'm not exactly the most active member out there. But here's a rant for you guys: Even if I find Dalek Dave an arrogant, uptight, posh, ultra-right extremist " :rolleyes: ", I would never downvote, let alone report him. The downvote thing is clearly meant for spam and idiots who post in the wrong forum, if it gets abused it will lose it's power. General caveman behavior like using pejorative terms, 'extreme' anti-intellectualism and celebrating events where people got tortured and murdered (and/or disputing whether they have happened even though it's sufficiently documented) may be an acceptable reasons to downvote. Disagreeing with someones opinion, sense of humor, political color, religion, or just not liking someone personally should never be a reason. And I know points are not important, etc... but it's the principle: -> I think it's safe to say that most of you here don't like the idea of ACTA, SOPA or PIPA. Guess what; playing internet thought police is taking an even worse stance than either of these bills ever could potentially do to you. You can't want a world to go in one direction, while all you do is going in the exact opposite direction. Your actions matter, however small they may appear. It's called leading by example.
Giraffes are not real.
I think some of the problem is the anonymity of it - since no-one will ever know who did it, it has no repercussions, so some people will always abuse it to fit their own agenda. (See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend). But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
-
Since I actually work at my office, I know I'm not exactly the most active member out there. But here's a rant for you guys: Even if I find Dalek Dave an arrogant, uptight, posh, ultra-right extremist " :rolleyes: ", I would never downvote, let alone report him. The downvote thing is clearly meant for spam and idiots who post in the wrong forum, if it gets abused it will lose it's power. General caveman behavior like using pejorative terms, 'extreme' anti-intellectualism and celebrating events where people got tortured and murdered (and/or disputing whether they have happened even though it's sufficiently documented) may be an acceptable reasons to downvote. Disagreeing with someones opinion, sense of humor, political color, religion, or just not liking someone personally should never be a reason. And I know points are not important, etc... but it's the principle: -> I think it's safe to say that most of you here don't like the idea of ACTA, SOPA or PIPA. Guess what; playing internet thought police is taking an even worse stance than either of these bills ever could potentially do to you. You can't want a world to go in one direction, while all you do is going in the exact opposite direction. Your actions matter, however small they may appear. It's called leading by example.
Giraffes are not real.
0bx wrote:
The downvote thing is clearly meant for spam and idiots who post in the wrong forum, if it gets abused it will lose it's power.
Errr...clearly it is not intended for just that. If it was then there a single button would be better. What exists is a range and a weighted range at that. Since it is a range it suggests that people can provide a subjective evaluation of how 'good' the post is. Since it is weighted it suggests that the opinions of some people are better than others.
0bx wrote:
You can't want a world to go in one direction, while all you do is going in the exact opposite direction.
I doubt that you can find a human that is not hypocritical in some way.
-
I think some of the problem is the anonymity of it - since no-one will ever know who did it, it has no repercussions, so some people will always abuse it to fit their own agenda. (See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend). But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
Imagine if a handle to the user who has voted is included in the “resent reputation points” table! A pure beauty! Two thirds of the threads would be something like: “Griff! Oh, Griff! What you have done! Why you’ve downvoted me! Why? Why?! WHY! I thought you was my friend! My best virtual buddy! How could you do this! How?! How?! What you was thinking?! I hate you!!!”
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
I think some of the problem is the anonymity of it - since no-one will ever know who did it, it has no repercussions, so some people will always abuse it to fit their own agenda. (See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend). But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
OriginalGriff wrote:
But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
I do agree with the reasoning behind the anonymity though... it would create problems between people for no good reason.
-
I think some of the problem is the anonymity of it - since no-one will ever know who did it, it has no repercussions, so some people will always abuse it to fit their own agenda. (See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend). But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
OriginalGriff wrote:
the problem is the anonymity of it
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: I have the feeling that "spineless" is systematically downvoting members, not for a particular message, in disagreement, or that he/she actually is or has something to be offended about. It seems that it is just an effort to spread some misery on the forums.
Espen Harlinn Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services My LinkedIn Profile
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
the problem is the anonymity of it
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: I have the feeling that "spineless" is systematically downvoting members, not for a particular message, in disagreement, or that he/she actually is or has something to be offended about. It seems that it is just an effort to spread some misery on the forums.
Espen Harlinn Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services My LinkedIn Profile
Do you really want people to resort to puppet accounts to downvote? ...because odds have it... that's what would happen...
-
Do you really want people to resort to puppet accounts to downvote? ...because odds have it... that's what would happen...
Albert Holguin wrote:
because odds have it... that's what would happen
Which is pretty sad ...
Espen Harlinn Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services My LinkedIn Profile
-
I think some of the problem is the anonymity of it - since no-one will ever know who did it, it has no repercussions, so some people will always abuse it to fit their own agenda. (See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend). But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
OriginalGriff wrote:
(See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend).
Damn those fucking Elephants.
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
-
I think some of the problem is the anonymity of it - since no-one will ever know who did it, it has no repercussions, so some people will always abuse it to fit their own agenda. (See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend). But I doubt that CM will relax on that and force any accountability - it's not as if this is just a recent problem.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
The anonymity should be preserved - but there would be a not-unreasonable alternative: A day-or-two delayed tallying of one's voting record as counts for each level (without any possible assignment to which posts were voted). It would allow one to observe habitually trollish (and whatever the opposite is) voters. This would confer some accountability without any particular hard feelings on an individual level. BUT As was noted in a chronologically earlier post on this thread, all that need be done is to create another account, abuse it by abusing legitimate posters until it's closed, and then do so again and again. My solution? Not taking it too seriously - I didn't joint CP to hoard CP'ian points (good thing, considering my total after all of these years). The only power a misanthropic voter has is the rise he gets from those who feel wounded.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Do you really want people to resort to puppet accounts to downvote? ...because odds have it... that's what would happen...
Agreed. But I believe the suggestion had been made a while back that down voting could be restricted to accounts with a minimum reputation level which would render the use of sock-puppets irrelevant for voting, unless a user wants to go through the effort of raising the rep of a puppet account for the sole purpose of the voting privileges. I doubt that many would have the gumption to bother with that.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
(See what happened to Michael Martin the other weekend).
Damn those fucking Elephants.
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
Michael Martin wrote:
Damn those f***ing Elephants.
It's just nature, Michael.... Elephants...[^] You don't really wish for their extinction, do you???
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
0bx wrote:
The downvote thing is clearly meant for spam and idiots who post in the wrong forum, if it gets abused it will lose it's power.
Errr...clearly it is not intended for just that. If it was then there a single button would be better. What exists is a range and a weighted range at that. Since it is a range it suggests that people can provide a subjective evaluation of how 'good' the post is. Since it is weighted it suggests that the opinions of some people are better than others.
0bx wrote:
You can't want a world to go in one direction, while all you do is going in the exact opposite direction.
I doubt that you can find a human that is not hypocritical in some way.
jschell wrote:
What exists is a range and a weighted range at that. Since it is a range it suggests that people can provide a subjective evaluation of how 'good' the post is. Since it is weighted it suggests that the opinions of some people are better than others.
Easy fix. Turn off points in the Lounge and other ancillary areas. Looking at someone's reputation is supposed to help you judge how 'correct' their answer is to a programming question. Isn't it? So who cares how popular/unpopular they are in the Lounge? Someone could be a complete ass, but if they're a C# genius and I had a C# question, I wouldn't care.
No dogs or cats are in the classroom. My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
-
Albert Holguin wrote:
because odds have it... that's what would happen
Which is pretty sad ...
Espen Harlinn Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services My LinkedIn Profile
It is, but even now people create puppet accounts for various reasons, like upvoting themselves or posting questions they can answer and accept.
-
jschell wrote:
What exists is a range and a weighted range at that. Since it is a range it suggests that people can provide a subjective evaluation of how 'good' the post is. Since it is weighted it suggests that the opinions of some people are better than others.
Easy fix. Turn off points in the Lounge and other ancillary areas. Looking at someone's reputation is supposed to help you judge how 'correct' their answer is to a programming question. Isn't it? So who cares how popular/unpopular they are in the Lounge? Someone could be a complete ass, but if they're a C# genius and I had a C# question, I wouldn't care.
No dogs or cats are in the classroom. My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
But isn't that why there are different categories? One may have an overall rep of 100K but if you look at their points and see they are underwater as an "Authority" you should probably disregaurd their programming advice. Or if someone has a low author score they may be new to writting, where as a 100K author can like take the critism better (they have been in that rodeo before). As for "Debator", it seems that is what it mainly is for. Granted a technical thread can give one many debating points, that is if one debates or discusses on the topic. It also gives info on their overaul involvement in the community. There are numerous members who have VERY high rankings, all focused on "Author". While they provide a key component to the community, they are not actually that involved. Some may disagree with this, but since CP can pull from your blogs etc. just because you write does not mean you are involved. Does being invloved int he community mean anything?
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
But isn't that why there are different categories? One may have an overall rep of 100K but if you look at their points and see they are underwater as an "Authority" you should probably disregaurd their programming advice. Or if someone has a low author score they may be new to writting, where as a 100K author can like take the critism better (they have been in that rodeo before). As for "Debator", it seems that is what it mainly is for. Granted a technical thread can give one many debating points, that is if one debates or discusses on the topic. It also gives info on their overaul involvement in the community. There are numerous members who have VERY high rankings, all focused on "Author". While they provide a key component to the community, they are not actually that involved. Some may disagree with this, but since CP can pull from your blogs etc. just because you write does not mean you are involved. Does being invloved int he community mean anything?
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
That only work if you check out the person. If you just hover over the name, you get a raw rep point score. For instance, you've got a little bit better raw score than I do, but a waaaaay better score in a useful areas. Someone just hovering over our names won't see that. They'll just see 16 and 13 and figure there's not too much difference.
No dogs or cats are in the classroom. My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
-
It is, but even now people create puppet accounts for various reasons, like upvoting themselves or posting questions they can answer and accept.
Albert Holguin wrote:
like upvoting themselves or posting questions they can answer and accept
I guess Chris would come down hard on such members fairly fast ... I've seen a couple of articles that were just copied verbatim from well known books - and they were removed fairly fast :laugh:
Espen Harlinn Senior Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services My LinkedIn Profile
-
That only work if you check out the person. If you just hover over the name, you get a raw rep point score. For instance, you've got a little bit better raw score than I do, but a waaaaay better score in a useful areas. Someone just hovering over our names won't see that. They'll just see 16 and 13 and figure there's not too much difference.
No dogs or cats are in the classroom. My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
Maybe I am the only one that does that ;P I tend to check out peoples overaul ratings once I am conversing with them.
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
jschell wrote:
What exists is a range and a weighted range at that. Since it is a range it suggests that people can provide a subjective evaluation of how 'good' the post is. Since it is weighted it suggests that the opinions of some people are better than others.
Easy fix. Turn off points in the Lounge and other ancillary areas. Looking at someone's reputation is supposed to help you judge how 'correct' their answer is to a programming question. Isn't it? So who cares how popular/unpopular they are in the Lounge? Someone could be a complete ass, but if they're a C# genius and I had a C# question, I wouldn't care.
No dogs or cats are in the classroom. My Mu[sic] My Films My Windows Programs, etc.
