Some new features on ATS (and soon BTS and PTS)

you are not your stars.






like your points

before post count

and well stars before that too

A member's personal average of stars is based on posts that have been scored... not posts that have not been scored.

A refinement to the system is coming soon. Stay tuned.

I think that's the right way forward personally and when there is a huge backlog of unscored posts it's probably essential.

Go to say I like the idea as long as it is responsibly used) and as long as I start remembering to score posts).

Okay, I went to bed last night expecting this "discussion" of stars to be over when I got up. I really thought it was no big deal. I've seen all the for and against posts and I understand that some think one way and some another. I'm not putting down anyones views on this, or everybody's- star that!

Look guy's first of all, this is first grade stars you're arguing over. ("Mommy, mommy, his piece is bigger than mine." or "Mommy, mommy looky what I got!" or "I don't like this game anymore.") And the shameful part is that the game players are mostly the ones that have been here long enough to realize that this is a forum that you come to for the purpose of learning, not getting rewards.

Myself, if I get any stars on a post, and any flags, at least I'll know somebody read the damn thing. And if they post back to chew on me for it, then I provoked them into thinking, instead of accepting the mush that passes for news and interest in the world at large.

And in an effort to p**s off everyone equally, let me say that it was short sighted on the part of management not to bring this out in a discussion only format before implementing it. That would have taken the edge off of this as now all the naysayers feel blindsided.

And so far, since I'm such a pain to everyone, maybe there will be a new invention to put up negative star count. Personally, I speak my mind, I'm not looking for a pat on the head, and I'm here to exchange IDEAS. Love me, hate me, it's all pays the same.

NGC2736 - by the third page people don't understand it.

I've been here long enough to see new members stop posting because they've been kicked down for asking questions. Stars will only help to create an even more "elite group" within ATS.

Cavscout and several others demonstrated how easy it was to mess peoples ratings up. On the third page people have already given their own views on what the stars mean and so on and so fourth.

Surely the idea is to limit the amount of things new members need to understand? ATS is a big place, lots and lots of forums and lots to come to grips with. If you make one thread and suddenly you have 1 star rating and have been rated by 10 people (for instance) I doubt this'll do much to build up their confidence and help bring them out into debates.

Cool. Seems like a pretty nice add-on to the site.

Good move! I see another benefit to this system as well. By rating threads, we can quickly find improtant quality topics that are well constructed. It has been a general observation of mine that occasionally you will find a very catchy title on a thread that seems to lack quality of susbstance, or vic versa, the title doesn't say much, but the thread is quite intersting and involved.

Tim

A question,

Is it a good idea to rate a troll one star? So that we can identify those who's purpose on this site is to disrupt the flow of information.

What about the people with conflicts of interests who come on here just to bash conspiracy theorists. Should i give them only 1 start? So we can identify the individuals who's purpose is not compatible with the intentions of ATS?

This could be a good system to flush out the dis info agents, perhaps.

No.

Please re-read the opening post. One star is a good thing... two is better... and so on.

Yes Odium, you are right. The question is the same as the issue with schools; do we dumb it down to the level of Ditmar J. Dumb*ss, or do we teach and learn and let the slower ones catch on as they can?

The easier you make it, the more people will be available, but the worse the quality of those same people. This is life, and it 'ain't' fair. If people come here and like what this place has to offer, then they need to work hard enough to be valued contributors.

Odium, I'm an old man. I took up the computer for the first time a few months back. I've had NO instructions, crashed this damn thing so many times it's not funny, and yet I didn't quit because it was too hard. I type slower than molasses, because I learned to type so long ago that it was on a non-electric model, and my fingers don't bend real well anyway. But I do it because it's worth doing. I'm figuring out how to get the icons and smileys to work, but in my earliest posts, you'll not see many because I'm not too tech smart, but I will be. Learning isn't a given, learning IS the reward.

And all the bit**ing in the world doesn't change the fact that this is now here. If it doesn't work out, then it will most likely get changed again. When, and if, the fan blades of life encounter the inevitable fecal matter that we all think may come to America, it won't be fair there either, but we'll deal with it.

Cheer up Dude, I'll give you some stars, already have in the recent past, if you'll come over to my house and show me what the hell "cut and paste" is, and if that will let me find an avatar as cool as yours. to put up.(I look sorta' ragged with points and a name but nothing else.)

Hi Skeptic, nice move!

This is a bit like the you tube rating, and that works very well, for the star ratings they get.

I for one will be using this facility like mad!

yey I have 2 stars already, now that makes it worth contributing!!


[edit on 17/5/2007 by deaman88]

IF you correlate one star as a negative, then maybe you would. But anyone who actually reads what the system is directed towards, they will clearly see that it is quite the opposite.



Remember that whole "Positive Reinforcement" "Negative Reinforcement" spiel from yesterday? You said that any system that enforces a Negative reinforcement is a bad thing? Well, there is nothing negative about this. A one star rating is a good thing. A two star rating is a better thing. And so forth up until a five star rating. Like flagging, the only negativity that comes with this is when a member decides not to "flag it", or "star it".

If you wish to congratulate a member on their effort, give them a star. If you don't, you don't.

Nothing negative about it.

The "school yard" type, or the competitive bunch will quickly look at one star compared to five stars as tremendously inferior. But do we think one flag to five flags is really any indication of anything? I know I don't. So why would this one?

Bottom line, if you don't like it.. don't use it. That way everybody is happy.

Well Chissler, the thing is that when I find a post good, I am not going to give that post one star.
Personally I don't understand this craze about not wanting to tell people that one of their posts sucked.

The way I see it, a post can be special for ATSers in both a negative and positive way, hence the system should be able to reflect this.
Is it am american thing to only want to say and see happy things?

[edit on 17-5-2007 by Jakko]

It is a good idea...but I think it will have negative impacts here and there, that we don't want.

If I stepped in and said, "Hey Jakko, you twit that post was a god damn joke! What the hell were you thinking?" How are you going to react? Negatively. When you react negatively, what is going to happen? Drama! My girlfriend watches soap operas. They are brutal. All that drama, all of the time! Man alive, how does one handle that crap?

We are here to think and act positively. If you have something good to say, you say it. If you have something negative to say, you don't say it. Quite simple actually.

I'm not saying we can not be constructive with other members, but telling them that their work outright "sucked", that is a potential drama bomb that should be reserved for daytime television.

It needs to be reinforced that a "1 star post" is a good thing.

Certainly not.

The tagging, flagging, and now starring systems were slow to launch on ATS. Why? Because I researched and watched similar features on other communities to see what works, what works really well, what sucks, and what crashes-and-burns.

In all cases, systems that enable negative input (DIGG) introduce enticement for groups to have a bit of "fun" to "get back" at people from competing groups. Irrespective of the quality of content, downward Digging, flagging, or starring opens up our threads and posts to similar tactics that detract from the issues.

In my mind, the negative-to-positive spectrum of possible flagging or starring is nothing more than the mindless puddle of diarrhea that defines "political debate" in the U.S. Issues are forgotten and focus is on who to like and who not to like. We should be above that.

Quality is quality, regardless of whether you agree with the point or not. We aspire to have the brains to admire excellent contributions from people we disagree with. We desire to encourage our perceptions to be challenged by debate that forces us to think hard about our position. We need quality content that forces us to think and respond.

Focus on the quality when quality is seen, even if you disagree. If we can do that, the rest will take care of itself.

I see your point SO.
I first thought it's close to impossible to make people aware of 1 star being a positive thing, but the solution you just implemented may just be the thing to make people (including me) constantly aware of it.
Good job!

Just So You Know

Everybody who starts a thread at least believes their stuff is automatically a 4 star if not a 5 star.

Yeah, it's too bad I can't rate myself.

;+)

Well I don't like it because I only have two stars.




Just being honest.