So We Have a Post Rating/Member Rating System Now?

If you approach this with negative expectations, then that is all you will receive. Personally, I think we need to give this a chance before we give up on it.

ATS is a place where we can disagree. The stars give others an opportunity to show their support or disdain. The friend and foe button has a similar function, but rating of individual posts adds an interesting spin to the forums.

We can now support one post as opposed to every one of a person's posts.

I can see the potential for abuse in a gang of people harassing a single member. Granted most systems have a potential for abuse and this one is no different. The flagging system has a similar "flaw," but it has worked so far.

That is what we have the moderators for.

Originally posted by Implosion
You are not your stars.

But does this change it being abused?
Does this alter the ability for people to down-rate others?
Does this stop people from "skimming" content due to the rating of people?

It does nothing but help create an "elite" sub-culture within this website. Many new members who will post say 5 threads before they get the hang of it and many questions (and threads which are a mistake) will end up with low ratings. How does this increase them wanting to post and contribute to the society?

Furthermore how long till people start using "Star Count" as a source of argument? He has 5 stars, you have 3 he must be right. I remember the amount of times Mods have had to post saying their view point isn't law and they aren't always right.

Being an uber-iconoclast, I'm in big trouble now.

I thought there wasn't supposed to be any negative reinforcement?

I'm basing my view on the assumption that your star rank will be based on the average of your total ratings...

What this means is, if you make a cotroversial thread, while no matter how right you are, if people don't like it they can go thru the thread and clicked 1 star all the way down the page. For instance, how people go into a rage if you challenge the commonly held myths about things like nationalism.


So instead of being able to 'applaud' or WATS vote really good and "way above" posts inside other threads, now we can be negative reinforced if you get under peoples skin on touchy issues?

You guys were right about the karma system being a dangerous idea. There are some chums who really need it tho.

You better be nice everyone



[edit on 16-5-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

I have to say I agree with everything Odium has said, I just wish I could have articulated
my dislike of the system as well.


Oh, and NO I've not given him stars for it, as I've decided not to use the star post rating system.

Originally posted by Odium
Furthermore how long till people start using "Star Count" as a source of argument? He has 5 stars, you have 3 he must be right.

I'm sure the naive few may think like this for a few moments, but I find it hard to believe that any amount of our population would ever buy into that.

The posts, as they always have, will speak for themselves. Our post bars, points, flags, and now stars, do not speak for us. Our posts do the talking, and anyone who judges anyone on anything other than the post, is severely misguided.

Originally posted by biggie smalls
ATS is a place where we can disagree. The stars give others an opportunity to show their support or disdain. The friend and foe button has a similar function, but rating of individual posts adds an interesting spin to the forums.

We can now support one post as opposed to every one of a person's posts.

I can see the potential for abuse in a gang of people harassing a single member. Granted most systems have a potential for abuse and this one is no different. The flagging system has a similar "flaw," but it has worked so far.

That is what we have the moderators for.

Flagging is only positive.

This is both positive and negative.

Furthermore, how can the Mods enforce a rule which we've not been told about? Where does it say I can't find every single post you've made and give you 1 star?

I don't see it.

The abuse is easy to do, when there's no rule you are breaking. Furthermore it really won't help new members.

Take the N.W.O. forum and see how many threads get locked because a new poster is asking something already said? How many negative replies do they get? Fantastic now they can end up with 1 star for making a mistake and have one hell of a time getting up from that rating.

Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by Odium
Furthermore how long till people start using "Star Count" as a source of argument? He has 5 stars, you have 3 he must be right.

I'm sure the naive few may think like this for a few moments, but I find it hard to believe that any amount of our population would ever buy into that.

The posts, as they always have, will speak for themselves. Our post bars, points, flags, and now stars, do not speak for us. Our posts do the talking, and anyone who judges anyone on anything other than the post, is severely misguided.

Sorry but I remember when Mods have had to say that their word (view point) isn't law. You give people some status be it achieved or ascribed and it can be abused and people will more often than not bow down to them.

Whoever disagrees with the post rating system sux. J/K

Seriously though, this is the best feature I've seen yet.

Veteran members are going to have to be more responsible and use this system wisely.

If you have the option of changing a star previously picked may help with this.

We cannot guarantee people not liking each other here. We are going to disagree, and I'm sure on many subjects.

This does not mean we have to disrespect each other.

Does it really matter if our stars are always at 1? I do not mind.

Treat people with respect and they probably will give you slack.

Then again, some people just may not like you or me no matter what we say.

Life is such.

Originally posted by Odium
Sorry but I remember when Mods have had to say that their word (view point) isn't law. You give people some status be it achieved or ascribed and it can be abused and people will more often than not bow down to them.

For some, yes. But since when does that equate to a majority? In any population this large, you will run into all walks of life. But honestly, I think your focusing on too many negatives here. While some may put too much emphasis on these stars, and some may use them as if they are a school yard bully, for the most part, this will be another tool of ATS that members can use to show gratitude to one another.

Nothing more.

Why should I - if I post something worthwhile - be punished because someone disagrees though?

You are meant to support members and allow negative re-enforcement to only be given out by Mods.

WATS.
Flags.
A reply to the post.
Applause by the mods.

This all helps build confidence.
Stars will just help to remove it.

Think of it as like School - you don't tend to take stars away from a student once they have them. You give them a star and once they have X amount they gain a reward. Negative re-enforcement more often than not doesn't work. Learning and Behavior by Paul Chance would be a good book to read...to be honest, I've never met a teacher or psycvhologist that uses operant conditioning and things negative re-enforcement actually works.

Well, to those who think this is a negative, I see your point of view. Still, I think it would take a really childish mindset to 1 star someone every time you saw them. And if that is done to me, so be it. It will be because I have created an enemy most likely.

Stars, or the lack, will not effect the content of my posts. It would be childish on my part to work for such a 'reward'. If that were a determining factor in the composition of my writings, then I a would be so shallow that I would never get stars to begin with.

Many of you have seen that I am not adverse to speaking controversially, and I will go on being me, with or without stars. I would think that they will only be a minor part of the overall tone of this site.

I agree 100% and I've said the exact same thing on these boards many a times. But for some reason, I like the stars.

And negative reinforcement is a reinforcement that takes something away from an individual that they never wanted in the first place. Not something that they did want.

If little Johnny is good today, I'll give him two hours extra of Above Top Secret tonight. (Positive Reinforcement) If little Johnny is good today, I'll remove the time limit for Above Top Secret tonight. (Negative Reinforcement)

Same thing, just worded differently.

5 stars for you NGC2736, you worked hard for that.

[edit on 16-5-2007 by thehumbleone]

well I have gone from zip to 5, and back down again. I have no idea how they work. So I'm content on waiting to hear from the Boss about how it works

I am not sure I have been clear.

Flags are great for the overall thread, but do not measure fellow poster's opinions unless they chose to respond. Not everyone can sit down and make a worthwhile post often.

Way above top secret was discontinued on ATS, although it exists elsewhere in the forums. This was limited to 2 per month which even then seems like a low number. It would have been interesting to divy out about 5 per month. I typically read about that many worthwhile posts in a day though.

Stars are used for individual posts making it interesting to browse and see how others will react.

I feel it adds an important spin to ATS. You can disagree with me and I welcome open and honest debate.

The mods can applause whenever they wanted to. This however, adds a lay mans edge to it. This makes posting much more exciting (in my humble opinion anyway).

[edit on 16-5-2007 by biggie smalls]

Although I am a fairly new member, I believe that the stars system is pretty cool, anything added to ats, mostly the flagging system for me, is a great idea.

Originally posted by NGC2736
Well, to those who think this is a negative, I see your point of view. Still, I think it would take a really childish mindset to 1 star someone every time you saw them.

Fake E-mail Address. New account. 1 Star you up and bang...

I've had to speak to mods last year about people making threats to me through U2Us, I've had posters follow my topics just to cause problems prior to this. All you do is give these people one more chance to ruin people and to push people away from the site.

If you were a new member who made a mistake and ended up with 10 people rating you 1 star, would you post again? Sorry but such re-enforcement doesn't work in Schools so why would it here?

Use the example of operant conditioning.

You have a child: When he is good, you reward him. When he is bad, you do not reward him but you do not remove the reward away from him. You limit the ability for him to do something he enjoys. In the long term he then realises - if I am good, I get a reward. So I'll play ball and behave.

You can see this on the site.

I am good, I post a thread and do not break the terms and conditions. If I do the mods Post Ban me to deal with me/cool me down. If I am too bad they remove my ability to fully post. Oh wait, I've just posted something that is within the T&C of this website. But people disagree - fantastic, now instead of them having to defend why I am wrong they can give me 1 star? They can make one post, say very little and instead I am punished. All because someone disagrees with me.

More information coming later...

however...


There were similar complaints/concerns when we launched the thread flagging system, and after a few months, it's a valuable and reliable system to increase the visibility threads you feel are important. There were complaints it would be abused, but any abuse ended up being rare.


ATS is a community like no other. It's proven it can be trusted. This is just another method to place increased editorial control/management into the hands of every member.