Originally posted by enjoies05
Well I don't like it because I only have two stars.




Just being honest.

LOL. Yeah, I only have two stars also.

But I dont go on the ATs really, I stay on the BTs. I just got the two stars from your thread, enjoies05..

Originally posted by selfless
It's wise not to rate our own posts right?

Yes that is probably not the best idea.


The admins probably have a tool that tells them if a user had ranked his/her own posts .

You can't rate your own post, it just gives you an error.



Not that I've tried or anything...

sorry if this has been answered but i wanted to know how do you know if and on what post you have been starred on?

I'm opposed to this concept. It really does nothing to ad to the quality of the site, all it really does is cause strife among members ("WHY DID I GET TWO STARS!? ZOMG!") and make people ignore posts in favor for others. Thats not really "denying ignorance" thats just allowing people to pick and choose what they read while ignoring other members. It sets up for more of a superiority complex and the sense of elitism thats already rising on the board.

thumbs down, in my opinion.

Originally posted by WolfofWar
I'm opposed to this concept. It really does nothing to add to the quality of the site, all it really does is cause strife among members
and make people ignore posts in favor for others.

Truth.

The thread filter is GREAT, though.

Originally posted by WolfofWar
I'm opposed to this concept. It really does nothing to ad to the quality of the site, all it really does is cause strife among members ("WHY DID I GET TWO STARS!? ZOMG!") and make people ignore posts in favor for others. Thats not really "denying ignorance" thats just allowing people to pick and choose what they read while ignoring other members. It sets up for more of a superiority complex and the sense of elitism thats already rising on the board.

thumbs down, in my opinion.

I tend to agree. It seems like a popularity contest to me. It really doesn't measure post quality, as I've noticed by looking at some of the heavily starred posts.

But, give it some time. Maybe the benefits will eventually become apparent to us slow learners.

But there are no benefits to such a thing, nothing beneficial to quality posts. Thats the problem. It really just makes ATS a conspiracy youtube.

"Ha I liked what you said, five stars!"

"I'm opposed to your fews, one star."

Theres nothing productive about it, and everybody problematic about it.

Originally posted by selfless
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.

You mean all one-star generals will indicate that they're in the troll category? Hmmm...I'm on the edge, with 2 stars right now. One less will mean I'm a freakin' troll??
Oh yeah! I'm outta here!!

In my mind there are two ways you could treat the Star System .
You could give a rating out to every member or most the member who post on a thread that takes your fancy. Attentively you could just give out four or five star ratings to posts that you would have given a WATS to in the past.

I am looking forward to both feathers being implemented on AP and BTS.

Instead, how about a star for every 10,000 points? Half a star for every 5,000. So if I have 36000 points, that adds up to three and a half stars. Just like the movie ratings, what?

So now that indicates:

* The member has been on ATS through thick and thin for a considerable period of time.
* Someone who has written quality posts which have earned him applauses from the mods which in turn have contributed to achieving those elusive stars.
* This will also give an idea as to the number of replies he has received to all his posts.

In a nutshell, this will give an idea about the 'personality' of an ATSer. And it'll be clean, simple, unbiased, and honest. Probably save some bandwidth too!! Bloody good idea, eh?

And oh yes, why not Silver stars instead of Gold stars? You get one Gold star for every 100,000 points. So if I have 112,000 points, I get to earn one gold and one Silver star.

Simple eh? You bet! Now where the devil's my beer? Cheers!




[edit on 18-5-2007 by mikesingh]

I am not a number, I am a free man!
And as a free man I....
oh wait...
hello there...
I have 5 stars...
Well goody for me!

Nah, just joking.

I do hope that this ranking system stays fair, and does not encourage the formation of little cliques based solely on friendship over the pursuit of excellence and intellectual expansion.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not the best or most active poster, and I'm wrong quite often and even prone to outbursts...
um...
hmmm....
uh...
please don't take away my stars...
I'm nothing without them...
( )




[edit on 5/18/2007 by wu kung]

Ah, so some people want to change the star system to adjust their own star ratings huh?
Based on points no less...
Hmmm...

Well, what ever happened to the whole "quality over quantity" thing?

It's not always how many words you know, it's how effectively you use them.
Yes?

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
sorry if this has been answered but i wanted to know how do you know if and on what post you have been starred on?

does anyone out there know?

guess no one likes me as i dont have any stars
goes and weeps in the corner

by the way excellent feature

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
does anyone out there know?

You'd have to go back and look at each individual post. it shows on the posts which ones have been starred and the average value for each.

Points? No, bad idea. Points are spendable. All a high point value really shows is someone's been active and not spent their points. Want to save some bandwidth, it could be done by not showing exact point counts under every avatar. Maybe.

Let's let it ride and see how it works out. You KNOW it'll get tweaked as we go.

Rating seems nice and it works in theory, but in practice there is one problem, actually two of them:

1.) members refrain from speaking their mind or not agreeing on something, in order to avoid low ratings -- in short they appear as worthless rating-wise after they don't agree with multiple people

2.) any system where you build online ego/personas is not very healthy, for example with post ratings someone may just agree on all sorts of topics, just to get better rating overall and then others will respect that member while in reality member just said yes to anyone -- what they want to hear

So you see, system which awards 'yes men' is not very good for healthy discussion or any organization. You always need some friction and people who disagree with you, if you really want to deny ignorance, as you are proud to say.

Originally posted by 64738
1.) members refrain from speaking their mind or not agreeing on something, in order to avoid low ratings

I doubt it. I've read this board long enough to believe the vast majority of members aren't about to self-muzzle their opinions over a ratings system.

2.) any system where you build online ego/personas is not very healthy, for example with post ratings someone may just agree on all sorts of topics, just to get better rating overall and then others will respect that member while in reality member just said yes to anyone -- what they want to hear

Somewhere a thread exists about the Digital Ego. But I'm not too worried about the members of this site getting too "yes happy". Up to now, if anything there's been more concern about too much ego-caused friction. Pick any ATS topic and post a thread on it. Sooner or later, someone will come along to disagree with you. I've never tried coming out in support of cancer, but if I created a "down with cancer" thread, there'd eventually be a Cancer Defense League member show up to argue about it.

So you see, system which awards 'yes men' is not very good for healthy discussion or any organization. You always need some friction and people who disagree with you, if you really want to deny ignorance, as you are proud to say.

And you'll be happy to learn I disagree with you. Which means we agree about disagreement.

Let's give it a chance to work. if people use the system the way it's designed to be used (and I think they will), it'll work.

My only issue is now I've got flags and tags and stars and whatnot, it's almost becoming too much like actual work.

I speak out of experience. Post ratings, karma and other crap is evil and encourages self-censorship. There should be some guidelines and rules to avoid dump-like forums like GLP but too much rules, multiple ratings and options is counter-productive.

Yes, i am happy you disagree. That way we avoid extremes and narrow-mindedness.