posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 12:54 PM
Was the star system introduced so that people could skim through a long thread and find those posts deemed most relevant to the discussion?
If so, it's a good idea, but the problem is that anyone can give anyone else a star. Which means people might give stars for someone having the same
opinion rather than for having raised useful new discussion points.
A one sentence posting that says something like 'Bush is an *&!@' could get several stars from Bush haters.
If we had another system whereby truly interesting threads could be given a 'thumbs up' or a 'light bulb' it would be more helpful. It would
require that only forum moderators could award this mark of distinction.
And, unlike the star system which is only relevant to a single post, this moderator-driven mark could be tied to the individual in addition to his/her
single postings. That way, the individual could, over time, develop a high rating based upon the quality of his/her discussion points. At some point,
with enough of these marks, the user could be allowed to join moderators in doling out this award to others.
It wouldn't be about the quality of writing -- people shouldn't be hindered just because an aptitude for the written word isn't their strong point.
It should all be about what insight and useful thoughts you bring to the thread.
That way, if you wanted to explore a thread, you could concentrate on those postings with this new mark, knowing it was awarded for excellent content.
For the serious user, you could have private threads with admittance for only those that have achieved a certain rank. The public forums are the
lifeblood of content, but maybe every now and then those seeking meaningful debate would like a private place in which to conduct it.