posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 07:53 PM
Originally posted by Jakko
10 retards have the power to secretly screw up the news.
How much sense does that make?
After a commment like that you wonder why the voting has
to be anonymous? Just because someone may not agree with you does not make them a
"retard". And I might have voted "No, introduction" on that one also -- Because the instructions clearly say that you have to have an opening
paragraph and you had and opening sentence. And then I would have checked back to see if it was corrected so that I could vote yes. Maybe you could
have u2u'd a friend to read the article and get back to you with why they thought you might have gotten some of the no votes. Remember that most of
the no votes are ones you can try to fix and then the person may vote yes.
Now, you might believe this means I agree with the way the voting system is set up right now -- but if you have read any of my comments about it in
the past you know that I don't exactly like the no vote system myself. I have in the past tried to fix a story according to the types of no votes I
got and drove myself nuts -- so now if I felt the article was exactly what I wanted to say I would leave it alone -- if I felt that the voter
have a point that I just can't see - I would u2u someone to get an opinion from a friend - then try to correct it.
Personally, I would like to see something that gives the writer a tally of yes and no votes because when you get all the no ones you can get
discouraged but if you saw that you had 10 yes votes you might feel better. And I would also like to have a chance to preview my article before I
submit it - as I don't always catch mistakes - or might change the way it is written to try to get my point across better.
[edit on 3-10-2005 by justme1640]