Time to remove the post ratings?

Kannan Kalyanaraman

I'll second that. We dont need ratings for posts. I suggest a poll to get a feedback if we really need one. Kannan

Christian Graus

It's not working yet, but that was the idea. Right now the setting you choose does nothing. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
C# will attract all comers, where VB is for IT Journalists and managers - Michael P Butler 05-12-2002
It'd probably be fairly easy to make a bot that'd post random stupid VB questions, and nobody would probably ever notice - benjymous - 21-Jan-2003

benjymous

Probably a better option would be a "report this post" option, to be used for inappropriate content (and would only be usable by logged in users) Then the mods would be able to see a list of posts considered problematic, and would be able to take action if necessary (either against the person making the dodgy posts, or against someone voting posts down for stupid reasons) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!

Andrew Peace

The setting does work AFAIK - I'm set on Medium and it basically colours low-rated posts in grey and highly rated posts in red, and the rest in the usual black. -- Andrew.

Megan Forbes

I think the posts rating was a really cool idea. It's rather sad that we as a community aren't using it properly (by which I mean constructively).

A pack of geeks, pale and skinny, feeling a bit pumped and macho after a morning of strenuous mouse clicking and dragging, arriving en masse at the gym. They carefully reset the machines to the lowest settings, offer to spot for each other on the 5 lb dumbells, and rediscover the art of macrame while attempting to jump rope. -Roger Wright on my colleagues and I going to gym each day at lunch

David Chamberlain

How about if the post ratings get accumulated and then reported along with the author's name the next time he/she posts? This way, if the person continually posts very vacuous and drab messages, they get rated low, and on every post their average post-rating appears next to their name. The same when their posts are frequently abusive, controversial, of just plain stupid. The same would go for good answers, insightful comments, and those generally beneficial or humorous. For anyone that cares, this might have a tendency to let people know that others think their comments have generally been bad. It might also inspire some to try a little harder when responsding to something. On the other hand, it may just be ignored, as when even good posts get a low rating by those who just want to mess with the system. In this case, if a post vote is too far out of the normal range of other votes for that post, it is the voter who gets another mark indicating that they typically vote outside of the norm of others. While this may appear to reduce dissenting votes, it would indicate who the dissenters are, as these numbers could also be displayed next to the name for all future posts. Then, if we could get these posts and votes tied in to other web sites that those people visit ... Dave "You can say that again." -- Dept. of Redundancy Dept.

benjymous

This would work fine, if the rating system was used as intended However, the complaint is that people seem to be voting down a post, not because it is inapropriate, but simply because they don't agree with it. As there's no limit to how many messages you can vote on, and no apparent comeback to how you vote, someone who takes a petty dislike to you could create multiple accounts, and just spend all day voting down every post you ever make -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!

Rohit Sinha

Without wanting to say "I told you so", I um, want to say that I er, told you so. I was the one opposing the rating system when it was launched. Now people post to get a good rating, not always what they think. Posting has become an exercise in making cute/witty remarks and/or quotable material. If a person's vote gets rated down, he feels obliged to defend his point of view and will rarely accept his mistake or acknlowledge the others' point of view. Not good for an argument. Converts arguments into flame wars. Yes, and what you said too. Posts get rated down if the person doesn't agree with the content of the post. Even if a person proceeds to argue with the poster he/she doesn't forget to rate it down before doing that. Similar things happen to posts that get rated high. If I say good things about someone he'll promptly go and rate it a 5. But it doesn't affect me personally, since I have set the noise level to the "very high" and thus see only the lowest rated posts in grey colour. And I read all the posts that I think I may find interesting, not based on the color of the title. Adding more features to the system will lead to more abuse. IMO, it should be done away with and there will be peace again.
Regards,

Rohit Sinha

Roger Wright

Michael P Butler wrote: Posts are being rated low because the person rated doesn't agree with what has been posted I agree - this is infantile behavior. But that's not the rating system's fault. I couldn't care less if a post of mine gets a 1, a 5, or anything in between; often the rating is due to an opinion of the reader, rather than the quality of the post. But so be it. If we're going to eliminate the problem, we're going to have to limit membership to those with equal intelligence and maturity, and restrict posting privileges to those who agree with us. Not a great idea, I think. I like the current system, warts and all.:) Nobody wants to read a diary by someone who has not seen the shadow of Bubba on the prison shower wall in front of them!
Paul Watson, on BLOGS and privacy - 1/16/2003

Andrew Peace

Actually I was mistaken - my setting was on Very High. I used to be medium but I must've changed it at some point. Oh well: sorry, my mistake :-). -- Andrew.