A Suggestion to ATS Admin Regarding "Flags & Stars" Rating System

Not sure if this is the right place to post this but here it goes anyway:

I`ve run several foruns in the last years and I still run a very small one on general subjects, just for friends and friends of friends, so I`m not a newbie with these kind of things, but I`m not trying to teach you anything either as ATS is far much better than the place I run, so this is just a suggestion....

I`ve been penalized more than once just because I replied with a short statement. I understand you want to promote people to elaborate more when they reply to a thread or post, but you have to agree with me that many times a short statment says a lot more than an elaborated answer.

On the other side you have the Flags & Stars rating system which I think it`s great. I don`t have this system at my forum but I do have a rating system that NOT ONLY allow members to APPLAUSE others for their topics and posts BUT ALSO to REPUDIATE it through a NEGATIVE evaluation/point.
I bet this would make some think a bit before they post such ridiculous/crap/BS/lies... stuff just trying to get a few more flags and stars and I think it would help to expose trolls as well.

So my suggestion is that you have a negative evaluation of topics and posts as well.

the problem i see with a negative rating is, because of the nature of this site, people make "enemies" here.. i can see negative ratings not given because the post is nonsense but because people have disagreed in the past.. also there is a clique of some members here who always agree and support each other, so you could have a member who makes a good point penalized and given maybe 10 negative ratings.. (which will also influence other random members) for something that is not connected to the thread or post in question.

this system would be unjust and at times cause people to hold back or not to comment for fear of being negatively rated.. on your site its all friends and friends of friends as you said, here it is not like that..

reply to post by AQ6666


Members may also give negative votes toward member who they basically just don't agree with.

For an example you may not agree with the theory of alien origins, so you would give a negative vote, no matter of quality or substance. But who's to say you were right or wrong on that matter and to shun the members beliefs?

Get enough from trolls let alone giving them the power to destroy a valid members reputation.

reply to post by AQ6666


The suggestion of "negative" ratings keeps coming up.
It might work on a "niche" forum, where there is a kind of concensus around one viewpoint.
It would not work on ATS, because ATS holds so many different viewpoints, favouring so many different theories, that EVERY opinion expressed on ATS is a minority opinion, even within ATS.
So under a "negative rating" system, every single thread that appeared on the boards could be drowned in the negative reactions of the 90% of ATS who would disagree with it.

reply to post by DISRAELI


Thank you for your input. Indeed you all have some valid points here. Agree this is much easier to implement in a niche forum like mine than in ATS, but still possible if well defined by TOS. I really think this would make members think a bit before they post something. It would also help mods task and prevent direct conflicts betwen members.

Here we go again......


Why do you even care about flags and stars?!!! Why not just post and care about the content?!

I agree sometimes a one liner says it all and many one liners stay, mods can't see all posts every day. They are people with lives too.

As far as a negative rating system I don't agree with those. TOO many people will abuse it. Have you seen the maturity of some on here?

Originally posted by AQ6666
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

Thank you for your input. Indeed you all have some valid points here. Agree this is much easier to implement in a niche forum like mine than in ATS, but still possible if well defined by TOS. I really think this would make members think a bit before they post something. It would also help mods task and prevent direct conflicts betwen members.

Sure it would make people thing. For example, if we had a negative rating system I would think twice before posting about how ignorant Ron Paul supporters are for believing in straw polls. They don't like being told that because Paul is their Savior, so they would rush on over to my post in a herd-like fashion and pile on the negative points. That's how Ron Paul supporters operate, as nearly every straw poll indicates, though they have missed a few lately, which they conveniently fail to mention in the next "Ron Paul rocks!" thread.

Not to pick just on Ron Paul. Civility is strained on the 9/11 threads, too, for example, where people who suggest there is no conspiracy are regularly subjected to abuse--so much so that ATS management has had to add extra "patrols" to that forum. The point is that the community does not really allow everyone to freely express an opinion. Free speech is for yourself, not someone who disagrees with you.

The problem with your approach is that it encourages group-think and would discourage the iconoclastic or contrarian point of view. The system, in all its variations over the years, has always been an 'accentuate the positive' kind of system. That is a good thing.