Psychology of Flagging Threads

a reply to: Profusion

If i like a thread, I usually flag it and star the OP.

I read threads because I think the subject matter may interest me. I never look to see how many flags they got and the amount of stars given to the OP makes no difference to me either.

I flag a thread if I think it's worthwhile because I know other people do take note of the flags. I star the OP if it's well written or makes a good point.

Not all threads get both a star and a flag.

I star someone's post if they've replied to me too, to let them know I read their response. It would be nice if 'acknowledgement' stars could be a different colour so the other person knew for sure who gave it to them.

Sort of related - if I make a thread where the responses from others aren't likely to require a reply from me, I give all posts a star in acknowledgement because people made an effort to contribute to my thread - in the Off Topic Forums.

On the subject of stars, something I have noticed with myself and posting, and it is my problem, not others, because as you can see by the star count on my avatar, I don't care about the stars much due to an ATS bug, but when I post something sometimes, and it does not get any stars, in a weird way, it kind of hurts my feelings, and I have to just blow that feeling off.

Usually those are the times I post something having to do with a personal experience and I wonder if people think I am just making stuff up or what when that happens, but I have caught myself going "Why do I even bother?!" when that happens, then catch myself again and almost yell at myself for being to sensitive to stars on a post. I guess I don't care about accumulation as much as I do about knowing something was read and acknowledged .

It is a strange thing, and I try to ignore the feeling when that happens.

Sometimes I think people will flag a thread but not star the op because they want to promote their own comment/reply...

Interesting, I've always flagged to help 'bring up'(instead of bump) the info of the thread. Starring and flagging the OPs thread first post seems to go hand in hand. A thanks for the efforts and a bring up the thread effort.

Always wondered why there are certain threads pages long that are apparently important but not many flags. Maybe the forum has to do with it, or less flag participation when people just want to "chat". Or sadly, could be as you mention, "to derail " the thread without it gaining attention by way of flags.

I flag and star. I star and flag. If I go onto a thread, if I'm interested enough to stop by? hey...you get a flag and a star because thats the way I roll baby. I think its wicked douchey not to flag and star. What are you a cheap pr&ck? Flag and star & don't be douchey!

originally posted by: Profusion
Why do people flag threads?

snipped.

a reply to: IMarriedAGun

Sounds like a jealous victim.

a reply to: Profusion

I think there are a combination of factors involved in the star and flag process.

Some of the members have been here a long time and automatically star and flag each other regardless of the content.

Some of the members are new and star and flag for the heck of it.

For me, I will flag a thread for presentation and give a star for content that is meaningful.

As for posters in the thread, They do not have to agree with me for me to find their insight to be beneficial and I will star them for offering an honest opinion.

I flag important, or interesting content. Sometimes but far less often it will be for specific posts within the thread including my own from time to time.

The system is wonderful.

I star the OP far less frequently than I will flag. Sometimes the subject/discussion are worthy of a flag but not the Op presentation of a star.

a reply to: Profusion

You might be overthinking it. Everyone has different reasons for flagging & starring.

1. Sometimes I flag something simply because I want to "bookmark" the thread for future reading, even if I'm not going to participate in it.

2. Sometimes I reply a lot in a thread but won't flag it, usually because I don't agree with the OP, think it's topic is too obvious to bring attention to, or don't like the general direction of the posts in the thread. For example, I'm less likely to flag a thread if everyone in it is bashing Islam or black people. And I'm more likely to withhold a star or flag for the OP if that same poster turns around & starts making posts I disagree with in that same thread.

3. Sometimes an OP is only decent & doesn't deserve a star. But then someone else will make an incredible post which starts a chains of incredible posts. So I may flag the thread because of the chain of incredible posts but not because of the OP.

4. And sometimes, I may not care enough to flag a thread or reply in it. But I'll star some posts in it because I think they're well written or the posts stated what I was thinking.

a reply to: Profusion

I star and flag threads for:

(1) Rewarding creative energy
(2) Gratitude for entertaining me
(3) Encouraging additional contributions

So yeah, I star and flag a lot--regardless whether I agree with the topic.

a reply to: Profusion

Thanks for your insight Sigmund.

I'll star and flag anything I believe Is informative, funny or insightful. We can talk about confirmation bias till the cows come home but that doesn't mean every person is governed by bias.

a reply to: Profusion

I only flag topics that I feel deserve attention from the community, good or bad. And I only star posts that I feel contributed to the discussion, whether it was by the OP or not. There's no conspiracy with me when it comes to S&F'ing. I call it how I see it.

Sometimes I even star posts that I don't necessarily agree with if I think the poster made a valuable point or expressed an idea that I appreciated. But that doesn't happen very often around here!

Help! I am new, and ignorant hah

Is flagging a thread the same thing as subscribing to it?

a reply to: Profusion

Why do posters star an original post without flagging the accompanying thread?

I can only speak for myself and find it difficult in most cases to speak for others...but I may contradict myself further down in my comment.

Personally speaking; I flag a thread if it resonates with me and also star the OP - even without posting a comment. If it gets a flag - it always gets a star.

Why do posters spend a lot of time contributing to a thread without flagging it?

Personally speaking; there has been the rare time I have commented on a thread without flagging it and starring the OP because I found the nature of the topic, the INTENTION/AGENDA to post it, and/or views expressed within the OP extremely ignorant and/or does not remotely resonate with my personal taste at all. Sometimes I just felt like "denying ignorance".

That ignorant thread: "War On Western Heritage" making its rounds here on ATS is one I will comment on later without flagging or starring it because the OP displays ignorance at its finest.

Why do posters star an original post without flagging the accompanying thread?

It seems to me this means that the poster thinks the original post is good but the topic isn't worthy of more attention. I have some theories about what that behavior could mean:

1. The poster found the original post to be valuable but they have an agenda to try to suppress certain topics.

2. The poster thinks a particular original post was valuable but they don't think the topic of the thread is worth promoting. Question: If you feel like the original post transcended the significance that the topic has inherently, wouldn't that make the thread flag-worthy?

3. The poster doesn't care about others enough to flag threads.

Personally speaking; #2 seems to be more the case. Some topics are just interesting for many reasons but doesn't deserve to be flagged. Here is my own thread that I feel does NOT deserve to be flagged at all. TBH, I was surprised it did receive a couple of flags, and I appreciate those who did so.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Question: If you feel like the original post transcended the significance that the topic has inherently, wouldn't that make the thread flag-worthy?

Click my above link to my thread and answer that above question for yourself. Again, the nature of the topic and personal interest influences such behaviour.

Why do people flag threads?

I've come to the conclusion that many posters use flags as a way to push their agendas and biases, not as a way to promote a search for truth. That's the bottom line as I see it and it's disappointed me a lot to find that.

Again, I flag threads that appeal to my personal taste - nothing more. I'm not a policy maker, nor do I care about most issues I may comment on in threads here on ATS. I do have personal vested interest in SOME of the topics due to humanitarian and compassionate reasons.

When I log off of ATS or other social media sites, my immediate reality takes precedent.

My currency of life is all that matters - this is mind entertainment (distraction) for me via using social issues on social media sites to express my personal views on a certain topic. Again - none of us are policy makers. I am always aware of the fact that my immediate reality; my fabric and true currency of life; takes precedent over global issues expressed on social media. I'm presently sitting outdoors at pub patio sipping a pint as I type this comment, yet I am aware that my mind for this brief moment is allowing myself to entertain the subject of your OP.

The herd mentality (via the engineering of consent) often causes the lines to become blurred between 'Global/Social issues expressed on social media Vs. Immediate reality issues'. Most of the topics discussed here on ATS have no real immediate affect or importance on those who participate in them - many use these sites as an outlet to vent.

I state this despite being an active member of Amnesty International for the past three years. When I arrive back home from volunteering my time in a lesser nation, which to TBH is not very often (I prefer to live more like Mick Jagger than Bono,) my immediate reality trumps everything else.

I've come to the conclusion that many posters use flags as a way to push their agendas and biases, not as a way to promote a search for truth. That's the bottom line as I see it and it's disappointed me a lot to find that.

That may be true some of the times, but not true other times. Maybe what you perceive as "their agenda and bias" may simply be a form of mind entertainment - a way to distract themselves from their own immediate reality and nothing more (projecting their own lack of fulfillment in life). Also, there are many people here on this site who "walk the talk" have lived some of these issues and therefore do indeed have a valid reason to push an agenda and express their personal bias. It's all good from both sides.

Starred and Flagged for the great thread.

originally posted by: Profusion
For instance, if you're going to take the time to write a manifesto on a topic like we sometimes see on this site, why not flag the thread that you put so much effort into? I think that could be a sign of an inferiority complex. Don't you want to alert people to the content that you put so much time and effort into writing? Don't you think that's significant? If you don't, why did you write it in the first place?

Sometimes it seems like those manifestos are meant to derail threads. If that's the intention, the poster's agenda(s) and/or bias(es) would explain why they wouldn't flag the thread.

I don't flag threads (or star posts for the most part) largely because I don't think it's a good system, it has little to do with the content I or others have written but there's a certain type of post that generates a lot of stars and flags in the political section, generally a very biased attack piece and I think that using flag/star systems only serves to reward those types of posts.

And I write a lot of manifestos it's never meant to derail threads, but rather because I'm actually trying to discuss something in more detail than the typical emotionally charged 1-2 sentence reply allows.

a reply to: Profusion

You make valid points. For me, I flag if the topic is interesting, or, in the case of political stuff, if I agree with the poster. If I flag a thread, I also star the initial post. That's just me, though. I don't tend to worry about who wrote it, and have flagged and starred stuff from people with whom I disagree more often than not. For a lot of folks, I suspect you are correct, though. It's a good system, but any system has room for manipulation.

This is part ? in a series of *psychology of...* threads lately..

Perhaps we need a "The psychology of those that must outline the psychology of everything" thread..

Or perhaps the psychologists could just bugger off.. and stop making us feel dirty for anything and everything.

I like it, i think it could do with a boost.. i flag it.

Or do i have to go into detail about how mummy never kissed me and flagging makes me feel warm and fuzzy?

Kinda over the witch hunt and psychoanalysis.. can you tell?