Wish ATS had a way to down vote a post.

originally posted by: anton74
That pretty much sums up what happened when ATS had negative votes.

Gosh, I'm trying to remember the old system. Was it pluses and minuses? Something like that, if failing memory serves. It's definitely been a while.

That does remind me of the old "warning flag" system, when a moderator warning appeared as a little red flag graphic on a member's mini-profile. Sort of a scarlet letter, if you will, and up to five of them could be acquired before an automatic post ban kicked in (or something like that).

Predictably (and amusingly, I must confess), "bad boy" members took to acquiring them as badges of honor, and some even modified their avatars to make it look like they had lots of flags even if they had none. Some examples were long-running and bordering on legendary.

Unfortunately, collecting the real thing did eventually lead to account terminations, and despite what some may say, we try to avoid that, because losing members for any reason is always a drag.

I was very happy when we ended that practice, and I think experience has shown that when there are problems, the best way to handle them is without a lot of drama.

Getting back to downvoting, there are many "self-moderating" venues where they are used with debatable success. My own objection to them is that they do discourage dissent, reinforce groupthink and, in cases where downvotes can hide posts, kill spirited debate.

And let's face it: spirited debate is the best kind of debate.

a reply to: Majic

I remember getting something like -20 votes for questioning an OP's source once.

Maybe people could just give someone a star or flag if the make a valid argument that is well presented.

originally posted by: eisegesis
With an up and down vote, you can have manipulation. Stars are a positive reinforcement, for better or worse with less manipulation. I agree with everybody else. You should come here to speak your opinion, not click it.

There are members here that read only, or post rarely.

My suggestion above would work fairly.

It could be popular eventually, and offer a more realistic gauge of content here.

As it is now, It's like giving a teacher only the option to check and count correct answers and not count incorrect answers. In the end, the students all get an A and learn nothing!

a reply to: Majic

And of course the nosy people were clicking the warnings to see what they said to get the warning.

a reply to: IAMTAT

That is fine with me, but I very seldom post. I have been on this site since 2004 and you can see how many posts I have made. I was made to change my user name but kept my post count.

If you don't want any kind of down post get rid of the stars and flags.

ATS only counts approval.

Can you imagine how that would work in the real world?

You only count those who approve of threads or posts. You really can't "fail" here, not really. Think about it.

If my suggestion had been implemented how many stars and flags would I have?

Don't know, probably less, or a lot less, but with the negative feedback the experience here would be more meaningful.

I know they won't do it, and there are good reasons they have for that. So I just wasted these posts here...

a reply to: catt3

Until this post, I never thought of such a thing.

Ahh you want to cripple the freedom of speech by implementing a feature such as the one on r*ddit, where the flock can jump on the freethinkers everytime something bad happens, rather than using their groupthink for the greater good and trying to figure out the true enemy instead of attacking the messenger time and time again

You want to see what it looks like when you give the masses the ability to censor opinions that do not fall in line with mainstream agendas? Just have a look at all those hidden comments under every controversial subject.

It's like a sport over there, to find the opinion that DARES differ from what's being spoonfed to the masses, and downvote it till it's gone.




"Ahh, relief, now that nobody in the comments section is trying to remove the covers from our eyes, we can all go back to criclejerking ourselves to sleep again"

originally posted by: ausername
ATS only counts approval.

Can you imagine how that would work in the real world?

You only count those who approve of threads or posts. You really can't "fail" here, not really. Think about it.

If my suggestion had been implemented how many stars and flags would I have?

Don't know, probably less, or a lot less, but with the negative feedback the experience here would be more meaningful.

I know they won't do it, and there are good reasons they have for that. So I just wasted these posts here...

What would be more meaningful about that?


Want to test your funky ideas on the public with a chance of getting sh*t thrown at you? Just start talking to a stranger online. If you have the balls, try doing that in real life, almost always works!


I like this place BECAUSE we're free to say crazy things here, MSM "crazy" or actual crazy, doesn't matter, at least people have to be polite here, which is hardly ever the case irl

I don't like down votes. Having up and down voting makes it seem like a popularity contest. Sometimes, ideas are unpopular but they need to be stated. Sometimes the truth hurts but we all need to be reminded that there are more than one way to view a given situation.

As for stars, I admit I am a little sensitive and do look for stars. I need the positive reinforcement sometimes.

And yes I know my thought are sometimes incoherent. I am not the best at expressing my views.

Down votes are not a good idea for a site like this for several reasons.

1. As others have mentioned, people can gang up on others to create a lot of down votes. Just factoring in the multiple accounts and dis-info sorts, valuable information/good threads could be disregarded that shouldn't have been.

2. Allowing down votes could lead to threads and posts being eliminated altogether if enough are made. Similarly, members could become ousted due to down votes in this manner.

3. Down votes just make people feel badly when they have an unpopular opinion and are then less likely to post later on. That's not encouraging the kind of atmosphere ATS is about. This does not include trolls, who sometimes live for down votes and their numbers would increase as well.

4. Again, as others have mentioned, this is a discussion forum with the intent for human input rather than a hot or not poll. We deny ignorance through evidence, explanation and discussion; not by merely hitting the star button.

Stars are encouraging and a positive way to respond to something you agree on by others, but for me and many other people on here, they don't weigh that much really to them. Responses to posts DO make a difference, however and it's always nice to see that others have taken the time to read what you posted.

If you don't like a post, don't read it. Stars & flags are not mandatory.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: catt3

I don't like your thread, so I won't give you a flag.
I don't agree with your post, so I won't give you a star.

How hard was that?

and your dislike is thus perceived only by your mind...no one else.

I think it's a good idea...I would defo dislike more than I like...


something like this -->

Well I don't think that will happen any time soon. I see this site as being an effective tool to manipulate perceptions of opinion. By "whoever" wants to utilize it for that purpose. If a post is starred a lot by "whoever" it can give the impression that whatever idea or opinion was starred is a widely held belief.
I have seen plenty of instances on here where a post received a lot of stars for no apparent reason. We have to look at this site as a "tool" that is most likely being used for both good and bad purposes. The ability to "unstar" a post would take the ability t for "whoever" to manipulate...this of course is based on the assumption that everyone is able to only star a post one time.

While your there, why dont you make a petition against free speech too, if you dont like what your reading , change the station.

originally posted by: HarryJoy
Well I don't think that will happen any time soon. I see this site as being an effective tool to manipulate perceptions of opinion. By "whoever" wants to utilize it for that purpose. If a post is starred a lot by "whoever" it can give the impression that whatever idea or opinion was starred is a widely held belief.
I have seen plenty of instances on here where a post received a lot of stars for no apparent reason. We have to look at this site as a "tool" that is most likely being used for both good and bad purposes. The ability to "unstar" a post would take the ability t for "whoever" to manipulate...this of course is based on the assumption that everyone is able to only star a post one time.

Yep
What you describe would no doubt reinforce group thinking and the herd mentality as opposed to free thinking and individuality.

I like to get stars because then I know I have been read, the simpatico is nice too.

Negative stars are OK with me.

Is there any way to display a count of the number of readers?