Forums: Announcements: Re: [j_ung] Forum Post Rating: Edit Log


Feb 3, 2009, 9:29 PM

Views: 7308

Registered: Aug 10, 2005
Posts: 673

Re: [j_ung] Forum Post Rating
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  

j_ung wrote:
Now, heh, I know the temptation to pile the ones onto a person you dislike is great (or in the case of the BET pile them on your friends). Try not to do that, huh? Try to limit your ratings to the content of each individual post.

J, you cannot possibly believe that people will approach this that way. Seriously. If that kind of respect isn't shown in actual replies, which are not anonymous, how much less will it be shown in anonymous ratings? When there were ratings before in the form of trophies and turds, do you really believe that people did it for the greater good? If not, why would anyone start now?

I must admit some curiousity about what you mean by "the quality of posts." Does it refer to climbing safety/technique? If so, shouldn't only those who know what good climbing safety and technique are be able to rate it in other people's posts? Otherwise the rating is useless. Is it regarding tone? If so, can't anyone simply read a post to gauge that for him or herself? Whatever "quality" represents, shouldn't the rating votes of those with low-ratings figure less prominently in the average to make room for the presumably higher-quality/more useful votes of the higher-rated users?

In reality, this kind of post rating is far more likely to be approached as an "I agree/I disagree" and an "I like/don't like this person" rating than a "I support/do not support the quality of this content" or an "objectively speaking, this is a member whose judgment should/should not be trusted" rating. Also, all this time after the demise of trophies and poo, there are people who never dropped the subject, so your suggestion that something will change "when the novelty wears off" can't hold water. People used those ratings the way they used them when the feature had been on the site for quite a while.

But you are very, very smart, and you have always come across as reasonable, so of course you know all of this. This is why I'm not even sure why you'd attempt to sell this as a legitimate way to gauge quality on this site. If you'd said it was just for fun and not to be taken very seriously, then at least it would have seemed more honest.

And, for the record, I don't think the Ladies Room is a good place for these ratings at all.

(This post was edited by htotsu on Feb 3, 2009, 9:30 PM)

Edit Log:
Post edited by htotsu () on Feb 3, 2009, 9:30 PM

Search for (options)

Log In:

Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?