The "Starred and Flagged" Conspiracy

I'm no mod but wouldn't this thread suit board and business questions? I mean I doubt the OP would want all the stars he/she has already recieved.

reply to post by MrPenny


loved the way you used the smilies.

I guess I'm guilty of muddling up the system with my misunderstanding of the starred and flag issue.

I always tell people because I have always seen people do the same (call me sheeple) I thought this was the only way to let a poster know you regarded their thread or post highly. I gave little thought to the external view of how such things were used metrically and was inclined to assume it was something that the owners/operators managed for their own book keeping purposes.

I didn't realize that it had something to do with board mechanics and what gets place where on the list of threads.

I thought it was newer stuff on top or most commented stuff, or perhaps I just never paid attention.

reply to post by CommanderSinclair


So there's automatically no conspiracy because you say there's no conspiracy? Using your own words, is that not also your opinion? There's no way to prove it either way at this point, so I do not see the harm. If you can state harm in making it public, then please do. Also, if you have been on ATS longer than 5/30/2008, please state that as well, because for somebody to have been here for less than 10 days try to tell me this doesn't not really "stick" with me.

reply to post by Knights


No, because it's a possible conspiracy, so it should stay here. If a mod wants to strip my topic of all stars and flags so that I'm not depicted as being hypocritical, they may.

reply to post by Maxmars


Well, I hope there aren't more people that think this way (that starring and flagging is the only way to respond highly to a topic), because if that is the case, it could explain a lot.

[edit on 6/6/2008 by SonicInfinity]

I originally thought stars and flags were "rewards" to be given when someone has an exceptionally well thought out or thought provoking post - regardless of whether or not the post fit within your worldview.

Boy, was I wrong. On ATS, the vast majority of users only star and flag threads that agree with their own extrodinary narrow worldview - regardless of the veracity of the research behind the claims or the points made.

If you make a well thought out and good post that goes against the hive mind (for example, saying something positive about George Bush), people will bash you regardless of the veracity of the research your post involves and you will get no stars or flags. If you do make any random thought that is parroting the will of the hive mind (for example, bashing the US government for any reason), you will get a ton of stars and flags, even if its nothing but a thoughtless rant.

Its really rather sad. It ends up being one huge circular practice of the board propagating what it wants to believe (instead of the truth) and parroting the ideology of the majority of the members regardless of whether it is right or wrong.

[edit on 6-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

I need to verify my direction.

I STAR because the information posted was both pertinent to the subject matter (or, rarely, if the post itself was so entertaining within the context of the thread that it was outstanding - effective, or pleasant, or insightful, or witty, or it made me feel good (either personally, or generally), or because I WANT TO for reasons that I formulate within myself, based on whatever bias or prejudice is unknowingly within me.

I FLAG because I believe that the Thread is an exemplary component of whatever the prevalent CT meme, or Breaking topic is. This is specifically evaluative and not emotional.


I am definitely missing the transgression here. Does this community self-deterministically apply these controls?

reply to post by Maxmars


I had to read that about three times to try and figure out what you are saying. It's not that I did not understand the words; I was just confused as to the manner of which you were applying them.

There is no law-breaking going on when one flags or stars a topic, but to say there is not at least one person out there with an ulterior motive is foolish, especially with no evidence to the contrary and no way to see for one's self if such actions are being taken.

So to answer your question at the end, there is no absolute way to see who is flagging what topics, and that is what I would like to be changed, given enough support and positive feedback from others (which I have seen so far in this topic, for the most part).

reply to post by SonicInfinity


A ploy to get points?Lol,really though who cares??!! I have noshame in saying that I am probably one of the leading members who 'constantly' star and flag,sure I'm liberal with it,but I think alot of threads deserve it,how can you narrow it down to one?!Even a few,there are alot of threads at any given time that deserve to be 'starred and flagged',some for the information they offer,some for the way they are put together(grammar,writing skill,attractivness,etc),some for both,or some for other reasons such as circumstance and members response to things in the thread/website.Yea,I always star and flag a friends OP,sometimes more than that,I see nothing wrong with it.Thats one thing friends are for[helping you out](especially on the internet on a forum site!)I agree that sometimes just because it is a certain member,(no names,but we all know who they are)every post,no matter how good or bad gets like 50 stars and 100 flags,but the point is that that member earned that respect from previous actions.I am still relatively new and wasn't here when they added the 'star and flag' system,but it was definitely a good move on the part of the staff of 'ATS' as like I said earlier there are many threads that deserve the attention or respect,not just one.Yea,it is more of a 'respect thing',but it is no different than real life(respected and intelligent people get awards and respect,acknowledgement),except here online you kinda' need something to alert other people of this posters reputation(points,etc).I see no 'conspiracy' here,and what a relatively 'irrelevant' one it would be at that!I saw this topic(example)on the 'hottest' new threads for the last day and finally had to post,the star and flags more importantly serve a notification purpose to draw attention to important or popular threads(like what happened here).Or is someone dare I say jealous of some other members points or starred and flagged threads?(LOL,just some friendly sarcasm)

Good post!By the way..............................

Starred and Flagged

Also,whats this deal about 'vote 3 times for WATS'?You mean three times in the same month for the same member,or only three people per month can vote for it?

reply to post by SonicInfinity

So to answer your question at the end, there is no absolute way to see who is flagging what topics, and that is what I would like to be changed, given enough support and positive feedback from others (which I have seen so far in this topic, for the most part).

What would be the real point for taking up more server space for that?What does it matter who flags and stars who how many times?

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
reply to post by Maxmars

 

I had to read that about three times to try and figure out what you are saying. It's not that I did not understand the words; I was just confused as to the manner of which you were applying them.

There is no law-breaking going on when one flags or stars a topic, but to say there is not at least one person out there with an ulterior motive is foolish, especially with no evidence to the contrary and no way to see for one's self if such actions are being taken.

So to answer your question at the end, there is no absolute way to see who is flagging what topics, and that is what I would like to be changed, given enough support and positive feedback from others (which I have seen so far in this topic, for the most part).

Yeah I was medicated at the time. Sorry I ramble. The point was, is the way I was using the feature somehow not the way it supposed to be done? I couldn't tell if I was guilty of something, I was confused myself.

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
Personally, I would love it if the data of who was starring and flagging a topic was to be made public, that way we could see exactly who is starring and flagging what topics.

NOOOOOO bad idea... then all the groupies that bump up threads like "I am an ex area 51 worker" wouldn't get so many flags and stars when the OP never even came back after the opening post with no id...



Starred and Flagged NOT but it is a conspiracy

personally i don't really care if a topic i decide to start is starred, flagged, bannered, or ticker-tape paraded round central park.
All i would care about is reading the replys and posts of those who would care to comment on the topic i brought up.
The importance is in the replys to the content and not the 'popularity' of said content.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by smokey101]

reply to post by smokey101


Exactly, and it seems to not be that way a lot of the time. For instance, if a popular user made a topic in the General Conspiracies forum and a newer user posted a topic earlier with more information, though, etc., on the Breaking News Forum, which topic would most likely receive more flags and stars? I'd like to think that most of the users here could see through that, but I wonder sometimes.

reply to post by SonicInfinity


The stars and flags system is being abused. I've seen an OP with not a single original word from the author chalk up dozens of stars.

Is this the purpose of the stars? Obviously, people were reacting to the thread title and, of course, there's that gang element that has been talked about from time to time.

I mean, isn't the star meant to applaud a well-written member post? Not a copied-and-pasted excerpt from a news article. That's what flags are for, right?

And, yes, the author was the one you mentioned. Why do his posts get so many stars and flags? Because they all have the same theme. And all you have to do is examine a couple of them to see what theme that is. And there is a group of hard-core members who have the same negative feelings toward the US, so they all react like lemmings. They want to be popular, and they are afraid to disagree with their clique. Examples abound.

As for the member who said that identifying the author of the stars would be a database nightmare, that is untrue. It would actually be a fairly mundane task. The info needed is already there. For example, you cannot double-star a post, so identifying the starrer is already routinely done.

reply to post by SonicInfinity

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
So to answer your question at the end, there is no absolute way to see who is flagging what topics, and that is what I would like to be changed, given enough support and positive feedback from others (which I have seen so far in this topic, for the most part).

I have petitioned the board several times for this feature. As I stated in my previous post, the member identity for stars and flags is already captured so it would not be a "database nightmare", imo.

I guess the real question is, why keep them anonymous?

You have my support for this feature.

For those who wish to comment further on the subject, I made a thread here. Any and all input there is appreciated.