Ahhh.. Pretty cool. Reminds me of school where we used to get those freakin report cards and holler, "Mommy!! I got 4 stars today!!" I get a kiss but then Dad hollers, " Dude, you need a li'l spanking to rev you up. Why the devil didn't you get 5 stars? No chocolate candy for you tonight or ever, untill you get those 5 stars!"

Darn! I've come full circle here on ATS!

Originally posted by frayed1

I myself, have no stars anywhere, on any posts, not even the ones I've received applause for.......and I have seen a number of 'lightweight' posts ( a couple of lines, with a quote thrown in) with several stars......

I've also seen a number of 'full-size', and well thought out posts by other members, still with no stars......so I ain't the only wallflower.

Ditto. We're in the same boat! And it's sinking pretty fast!! I've a lousy feeling we've already reached rock bottom!!

Cheers anyway!!



[edit on 17-5-2007 by mikesingh]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The ratings are on a 5-star scale that translate to:

.... that will translate to a 'group think' mentality taking place (think like the group = get more stars) as well as people heaping stars on their friends or those they agree with while not posting any stars to those they don't like or to those that are on the other side of the debate.

I'm going to be the cynical cranky voice here (not that anyone cares ). Sorry.

I miss WATS.

edited to add - ya' know .. this is in one of my psychology books. Educational psychology. Shaping the behavior of kindergarden children by giving stars. It's a thing teachers use to get the children to all CONFORM to the desired standard behavior. Now if I were a paranoid conspiratorist ..... hmmmm ....



[edit on 5/17/2007 by FlyersFan]

Bully for the stars systems. Its almost like First Grade, where life was simple and the paste was tasty.

I also like the thread "spool" feature for when replies by a single user get all wadded up and need a little organization.

You guys on this board should consider work in the private sector...

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The ratings are on a 5-star scale that translate to:

.... that will translate to a 'group think' mentality taking place (think like the group = get more stars) as well as people heaping stars on their friends or those they agree with while not posting any stars to those they don't like or to those that are on the other side of the debate.

I'm going to be the cynical cranky voice here (not that anyone cares ). Sorry.

Exactly! With 80,000 points in your booty due to having received all those applauses etc, you've just got a lone star to show for this?? There's gotta be something wrong somewhere. I loved the old ATS! I'm sure gonna miss it. This is all getting too confusing and biased

mike .. i went and found a good post of yours and gave you 5 stars for it. Now you shine like the sun .. which is a star.

How do you give stars i cant see any icon or tabs for this ?????

reaper .. its not on this thread. You have to go to threads in the regular part of ATS - like fragile earth or war on terrorism. At the top of each post is a bar with 5 stars and a question mark.

You hit the number of stars you think the post deserves.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
.... that will translate to a 'group think' mentality taking place (think like the group = get more stars) as well as people heaping stars on their friends or those they agree with while not posting any stars to those they don't like or to those that are on the other side of the debate.

Or maybe, many like my self will not be bothered about the outcome of the stars we get.

Just saying.

But this star system could result in a suck up state of mind when posting, for certain people.

It could also bring the flame wars and trolls to a whole new level.

But I assume this star system is a tryout and if it doesn't work good, it will be taken off?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
.... that will translate to a 'group think' mentality taking place (think like the group = get more stars) as well as people heaping stars on their friends or those they agree with while not posting any stars to those they don't like or to those that are on the other side of the debate.

I'm going to be the cynical cranky voice here (not that anyone cares ). Sorry.

I miss WATS.

edited to add - ya' know .. this is in one of my psychology books. Educational psychology. Shaping the behavior of kindergarden children by giving stars. It's a thing teachers use to get the children to all CONFORM to the desired standard behavior. Now if I were a paranoid conspiratorist ..... hmmmm ....

We hardly agree on much but we do agree on this. I watched it happen last night and I don't think the stars reflect an overly good idea of increasing knowledge to people.

If someone has the guts to join the site and then ask a question on an existing thread, it's probably only worth one star but how do we know if that one person has helped several others? Furthermore logically after 6months most people will end up with three stars. I watched it last night:
I disagree - you get 1 star.
I agreee - you get 5 stars.

Nobody based it on the quality of what was written.

I've never been the biggest fan of any subjective approach to things, especailly when all I see is newer members getting low ratings and being put off (because how many of them will fully understand the star system straight away?) the starting of even more groups of people - oh he's left/right wing, so am I - let's go hold hands and rate each other 5 stars.

Furthermore, to be honest I've seen how many posts about bandwidth and wanting fast loading times? Surely this just adds more and more to the servers?

I think people should not be so quick in dismissing this system.
I have seen it on several forums, and in time it balances out, and it works.
Right now, because it's new, it's only normal that people try it out, and the results are not representative of a situation in which people are used to this system, and learn to work with it.

I think one star should not mean "fair contribution". One star is something people would only use if they think a post is bad, or if they strongly disagree.
Besides that I like it.

;+)

Originally posted by Jakko
Think one star should not mean "fair contribution". One star is something people would only use if they think a post is bad, or if they strongly disagree.
Besides that I like it.

;+)

So because they disagree with a post they should give it one star? Surely it could still be a good post. One that is well constructed. One that the person has put a lot of time and effort into. Much of this site is opinion (with bits of evidence thrown in) and due to it there's no "right" or "wrong" answer and to give people 1 Star because you disagree I'd say is rather insulting to them and to any research they might have done.

I'm not sure why there is all this hostility regarding the new rating system.

Honestly, I see this as a 'fun', if not a somewhat frivolous, feature...

I can promise you that I wont be losing any sleep if no one gives me any stars...

Would that be nice? Sure. But... it just ain't that big of a deal.

Just my two cents...



[edit on 17-5-2007 by loam]

Throughout the recent history of ATS, the balance of activity shows "adult-like behavior" from the bulk of our members, regardless of age. The success of the flagging and friend/foe shows that we know how to be different, in a good way.

Based on this past experience, I feel I can trust our membership to provide a fair rating to posts they disagree with, but that provide interesting input to the debate. There are thousands of posts on ATS from dozens of active members who I disagree with, but which are well-formed thought-provoking contributions that push the debate in a forward direction. I tend to believe most of our members would rate such posts highly, even if they disagree.

This is the point of ATS, appreciating a quality contribution, even if you disagree with it.

If you don't think a post is of sufficient quality, don't rate it.

If you don't think a thread is important, don't flag it.

If you don't like a thread, don't tag it.


It's all part of a simple system that provides our members with the opportunity to collectively assign editorial value to content.

Originally posted by Odium

Originally posted by Jakko
Think one star should not mean "fair contribution". One star is something people would only use if they think a post is bad, or if they strongly disagree.
Besides that I like it.

;+)

So because they disagree with a post they should give it one star? Surely it could still be a good post. One that is well constructed. One that the person has put a lot of time and effort into. Much of this site is opinion (with bits of evidence thrown in) and due to it there's no "right" or "wrong" answer and to give people 1 Star because you disagree I'd say is rather insulting to them and to any research they might have done.

You are completely right of course, i was talking about a worst case scenario.
I would not vote one star for someone disagreeing with me. I would vote one star for someone disagreeing based on unfounded or ignorant logic.

I think in practice people will never mean anything good with one star. I won't anyways.

I would use the system like this:


One star - A post that does not contribute at all to a pleasant discussion.

Two stars - A post that contributes in a small way.

Three stars - A post that contributes to a pleasant discussion.

Four stars - A good post that contributes to a pleasant discussion.

Five Stars - A very good post like the ones you don't see often. Well thought out and pleasant to read.

Originally posted by Jakko
I would use the system like this:

You would be intentionally using the system incorrectly.

Odium

You've got only a couple of stars just like me! So here's our combined report card:

* Mental calibre - low average.

* Lack adequate initiative and determination to look for better quality topics on the net.

* Lack adequate sensationalism to qualify.

* Lack sense of purpose and focus.

* Poor written expression. (What the heck were you trying to convey anyway?)

* Social traits poor, as seen by the lack of required number of friends to punch your stars.

* Made a huge number of detractors due to your wild conspiracy theories that hold no water.

Overall Grade - Below Average. (Two Stars - **)

Advice - Need to pull up your socks to qualify for at least 3 stars, which will indicate to all on ATS that you are in the 'High Average' bracket, which will help in members deciding whether you are worth a read or not.

End of report.
_______________________________________________________
Cheers! Have a great day.

Here's a question-

Does making a post that garners no stars pull down your overall average? At this point, does getting "0" for a post work more in your overall average favor than getting 1 star?

A can of worms I was reluctant to open, but there you go.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Jakko
I would use the system like this:

You would be intentionally using the system incorrectly.

Hmmm I don't mean to do that of course.
I ment that in general a system like this provokes people to have make their own meaning for "one star" to "five stars".
Of course the meaning you gave them makes a lot of sense, but in practice I have not seen one star be used much for the meaning you gave it.

That could change of course, time will tell.

Originally posted by yeahright
Here's a question-

Does making a post that garners no stars pull down your overall average? At this point, does getting "0" for a post work more in your overall average favor than getting 1 star?

A can of worms I was reluctant to open, but there you go.

Yeah! That's right!! You may be on a high with 4 stars now. But if some dude doesn't punch, then your average plummets and you may land up with 3 stars pronto. Its all about averages!

Cheers! It's all in your stars!!