Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Stars, Flags, and ???

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   
I think everyone gives stars and flags for varying reasons, no doubt the reason is almost always subjective. However, I think we reward each other stars and flags in similar manners.

For instance, I award stars for a post I agree with, has mad a excellent point, gives an 'aha!' type of moment, or adds value to the discussion within the thread. I award flags that discuss important topics, are balanced and fair, deserve more attention, have a sense of urgency, or all around discuss topics that increase knowledge and information.

But what do you to with those threads and posts that do none of these things, deserving neither start nor flag? Well, we don't give them right? Fair enough. Yet, sometimes, we come by a thread or post that is so absurd, so full of it, so biased, or something that it actually should deserve something that reflects the opposite of a star or flag.

My question, have mods or staff considered a system such as this? Has this been discussed here before and what are peoples opinions? Even better what would they be? A pile of b.s.? Thumbs down? Maybe the ability for a member to take a star or flag away that note? I am curious what everyone thinks?

I personally would think the ability for each member to take away 1 flag per thread and 1 star per post as they do in awarding them to be a preferred method, if at all. We could note the most flags a thread has held and the most stars a post has had so we know how many have been taken away. For instance it might look like this: Flag 23/29 or Star 6/8 where the first number is current count/second number most count.

What say you?




posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:25 AM
link   
I'm quite sure they have (I'm 99% positive I have seen it discussed more than a few times previously) and in a perfect world that would be a perfect idea. But we love in a world of folks who will give threads and posts those "negative" awards simply because they do not like the member that posted them. If people would act like grown ups and judge things fairly this idea would be amazing. Instead... Here we are.

Members would be driven off of here really quickly if they pissed off one or two of the more "famous" among us. Their threads and posts would be watched continuously simply so they could attack it.

JMO... Maybe the owners would give it another thought though?? You never know!

BTW - You can actually take a flag away from a thread if you have previously flagged it then changed your mind about the quality of it during discussions. You can't get the star back though.
edit on 9/5/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:26 AM
link   
I say try your proposed method out for a few weeks and check the statistics.

I wonder what ATS would be like without flags and stars.....



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
But what do you to with those threads and posts that do none of these things, deserving neither start nor flag? Well, we don't give them right? Fair enough. Yet, sometimes, we come by a thread or post that is so absurd, so full of it, so biased, or something that it actually should deserve something that reflects the opposite of a star or flag.

That's when one must hit the 'reply' button, use some critical thinking and/or silver-tongued rhetoric, and address the post with words instead of stars and anti-stars.

Either that or just ignore the stuff you don't like.

Personally, I don't like the idea of a system that perpetuates negativity. I'd rather be balanced out at zero instead of in the negative


(They used to subtract ATS 'points' for certain offenses. Not sure what that ever meant though.)


edit on 5-9-2014 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

Those are good points but isn't this already happening with all the trolling and shilling? Though I can see your flags and stars going to zero in a heavily trolled thread really fast.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

Those are good points but isn't this already happening with all the trolling and shilling? Though I can see your flags and stars going to zero in a heavily trolled thread really fast.


We do see it happening on occasion. But not to the extent it would in a troll thread (as you mentioned). I do think there are those around that would make it their mission to continuously crush the folks they don't like. Not a lot, but a few. It's sad though because your idea is an awesome one if it would work the way it was supposed to.



a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

They still do subtract points. Though now you can't see how many you have or don't have. You get 500 for an applause still, but you don't know where it goes lol.
edit on 9/5/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
But what do you to with those threads and posts that do none of these things, deserving neither start nor flag? Well, we don't give them right? Fair enough. Yet, sometimes, we come by a thread or post that is so absurd, so full of it, so biased, or something that it actually should deserve something that reflects the opposite of a star or flag.

That's when one must hit the 'reply' button, use some critical thinking, and address the post with words instead of stars.

Either that or just ignore the stuff you don't like.

Personally, I don't like the idea of a system to reinforces negativity. I'd rather be balanced out at zero instead of in the negative


(They used to subtract ATS 'points' for certain offenses. Not sure what that ever meant though.)



Yes, I do ignore plenty of posts where you can tell it will be an endless back and forth and try to politely and critically reply to ones where I get the sense, or know, one is able to civilly discuss...and sometimes you just have to plainly call things out.

The negative aspect is the only issue I would have with a system like this as well. I was just thinking if there is a system other than replying that shows your support, why is there not one that shows your disapproval?



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

Thank you. Yeah, got to love them "internet tough-persons" out there.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
The negative aspect is the only issue I would have with a system like this as well. I was just thinking if there is a system other than replying that shows your support, why is there not one that shows your disapproval?


I'm not even very crazy about the 'star-reward' system. Anything that turns what is supposed to be fair, balanced, and civil discussion and exchange into a popularity contest is counterproductive to what we're all here for.

Flags are useful to prioritize the importance of certain information. Stars are for...prioritizing the importance of certain members?



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
BTW - You can actually take a flag away from a thread if you have previously flagged it then changed your mind about the quality of it during discussions. You can't get the star back though.


Good to know, thank you.

ETA: How about that, you can. Took one away and gave it back. Generally, I wouldn't not take my flag back for how the discussion goes as much of that is other posters. I suppose I would if the OP was baiting from the get go or gets really rude.
edit on 9/5/2014 by AllSourceIntel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:39 AM
link   
a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

They've been pretty much rendered useless anyway after that glitch gave folks millions of stars. I get a kick out of looking at the stats of those who were caught on it. It will say something like they have an average of 653 stars per post.






posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:39 AM
link   
I'm not sure some people wouldn't just unstar stuff simply because they can. In the most read threads, the beginning page is the most heavily starred, indicating that some people star simply because they are reading it?

Maybe thats an unfair assessment.

How about a profile page indicator of how many stars people give out in total?

That might be too revealing of ones nature.

I read all the time "Judging by your entry date--, number of stars--, posts--, threads--," etc.

Useless exercise to judge complete strangers by how much people get or give stars. One thing… some people have millions of stars, hard to contend with the tidal wave of respect they apparently have. Also indicative of how much effort it requires to fix a glitch in such a big program.

Not intending to rock the boat…



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:44 AM
link   
It's a broken system and should be removed completely.

Make a simple agree/disagree system where you are forced to leave a comment if you do either, top story should be calculated from amounts of comments made through the agree/ disagree's , that would create a more healthy discussion and a more fair view on what people's opinion really is, instead of now where you can only see the agree's through stars and flags with few comments.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
I'm not sure some people wouldn't just unstar stuff simply because they can. In the most read threads, the beginning page is the most heavily starred, indicating that some people star simply because they are reading it?

Maybe thats an unfair assessment.


Perhaps, an observation I've noted as well, but I am willing to bet most star when something is said that they like, which is find and dandy. The observation might also come down to the first page gives one a lot of information about the thread, and if its several pages long you might want to jump to the end to be current and catch up later...I do this sometimes.


How about a profile page indicator of how many stars people give out in total?

That might be too revealing of ones nature.


I actually like that idea. Too revealing to the wider audience maybe, but you are anonymous (except to mods/staff to a point). This might give us a better idea of the quality of community on ATS.


I read all the time "Judging by your entry date--, number of stars--, posts--, threads--," etc.


Very good point. I registered end of 2013, started using/talking last month, and have been reading since 2009 or so. You can't tell that by a profile unless one mentions so in their introduction...which is not always read and fair enough.


Useless exercise to judge complete strangers by how much people get or give stars. One thing… some people have millions of stars, hard to contend with the tidal wave of respect they apparently have. Also indicative of how much effort it requires to fix a glitch in such a big program.

Not intending to rock the boat…


What is this glitch? I have seem people with millions of stars/flags.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   
I have read comments that have had me yelling at my phone. I wanted a bomb button then for certain!

Then I realized people can't always tell when I'm kidding so I didn't suggest it.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

I never gave an introduction. I need no introduction! My name says it all!

ETA I can't see the number of stars a profile has on mobile

edit on 5-9-2014 by Iamthatbish because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

Interesting, especially in threads that there is either one side of an issue or another. What of those with a huge grew area or if you do not agree or disagree? It just is and you think it is a good thread/post?



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Yes, if you are a lurker, you should only be able to read but give no reward.

If you participate in the discussion it should show what side you are on and the choice you made to the topic or the person you answered, and your comment should reflect your choice.

It's probably not flawless, but do make people participate instead of just S&F.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

I never gave an introduction. I need no introduction! My name says it all!

ETA I can't see the number of stars a profile has on mobile



You are a bad/rude person, didn't your mother tell you to introduce yourself?
I don't think it is that big of a deal, no one noticed right?

Can you see flags or score or anything else on your mobile? My guess would be your phone is cutting things off to show other things...maybe hide the avatar on mobile? All just a guess.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:15 AM
link   
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

I like the idea and your way about implementing it, but it just wouldn't work because of some people just not liking some members and those who are too sensitive.

Its probably best left as it is. You make a post that the majority don't agree with and yet there is one lone star showing someone did. Then there's the issue of negative count. 6 liked it and 25 didn't.

I preferred it before the flags and stars myself. Unless I'm imagining things and I might well be, I think some people just create threads to get the accolades. It became rather obvious when they came to be that this was happening. Still though its always nice to see a star for your post.






top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join