Abuse of Star System in Certain Threads

Originally posted by jsobecky

You need to chill out, mrwupy. This thread had trended toward discussion of abuse of the system, and I was merely pointing out an example of that.

No need for you to be condescending or make snide remarks like "you need to go back to kindergarten or sunday school".

Listen theres no need to get upset. Keep in mind that the system was just set up. As time goes by and the more people that rank a post the harder it will be to just come in and strike down an average if there have been 100 or so ratings if one person strikes a 1 star its not going to drag down the rating of the post like it does with only 1 person rating it.

just give it some time.

Originally posted by chissler
In any democratic system, there is room for abuse. The flagging system, the newly implemented star system, both are open to a degree of abuse from certain members. How do we stop it? I honestly don't think I have an answer.

The star system was made and instituted as a way for fellow members to decide who THEY think makes good contributions to the boards. One 5 star selection is not damning to someone's record anyway, since it's just based on one man's/woman's opinion. Besides, the star system has no other purpose than to give we the users an idea of who we should be watching. If we discover someone that doesn't deserve the stars that they have... put them on your respected Foes list, and debate them on an open playing field.

I would also suggest that we stop doing what I term "post sniping", which is defined as making threads where we complain about someone's post(s) in another thread(s). There are plenty of ways of making them go away; namely the ignore button for starters. Try it. You'll like it!!

Thus ends my rant...

TheBorg

jsobecky, it seems that someone went back into that thread and gave you 4-5 stars for each of your posts, rounding them out to 3 stars each. Strange how that kind of stuff turns around... (by the way, it wasn't me. somebody else got there first). But, personally, I don't think the star system belongs here on ATS.

ATS is too classy and scholarly for this kind of nonsense. The star system attracts fools, encourages trolling, and tends to lead members to do nothing but pat each other on the backs for agreeing with each other.

We already have applauses, ats points, and flags to determine the quality of posts, and I think the last thing we need is something that lets trolls determine the quality of our members.

... and MajorMalfuntion, don't be a hypocrite.

Well I have decided to give everyone 5 stars no matter what.

At first I started out grading them and to be honest gave no stars at all to some members I don't like...the ones that get under my skin. I did feel that was rather bitchy. Just because I don't agree doesn't mean they should miss out on a peice of the pie!

I have given it quite a lot of thought and my new approach is this:

5 stars automatically granted just because they are contributing on ATS and they are using their brains...thats right, members are regular thinkers. Perhaps a small minority are trolling the boards but most are denying ignorance just being a member.

Originally posted by TheB1ueSoldier


... and MajorMalfuntion, don't be a hypocrite.

Excuse me? Where are you getting the information that I'm being a hypocrite? I brought up the problem. Just because someone assumes that I am one starring someone else's posts does not make it true -- there is no way of knowing WHO is doing this sort of thing.

As I recall, in the opening of this thread, I put that I was not naming names. This was because I have no idea who is doing what I suspect is being done and am not pointing fingers at anyone without proof.

So let's leave the personal aspersions out of this and speak of the matter as it was intended, in the abstract (as to offenders).

Personal attacks get no one ANYWHERE.

Well I got an idea how to "fix" this abuse ot the new star system;

Every member should have an insight into WHO gave him how many stars; we could then quickly find out, who is on purpose downgrading certain posts, just because he or she do not like that certain member.

Thank You.

Hmm... but that could also turn into

Tim: Bob gave me 1 star because he hates me!

Bob: No! Gave you 1 star because I didn't think your post was that great!

Tim: Yeah, ok...Ban him!

Bob: No! Ban him!

Tim:

Bob:



It could get pretty ugly.

Just an idea here. Maybe it would help to even out the ratings that so many worry about if more people used the stars.

To get more participation, the star rating buttons could be moved to the bottom of the post. That way, people could rate the post without having to scroll back up, and therefore more people, besides one who just hate you, would be rating you.

Not that I really care, but it seems that the controversy on this isn't going to go away. I've already said that I feel that scrapping it is best, but if there's any saving it, some kind of changes will need to be put in place.

Actually, enjoies, I think this is already happening -- with no proof whatsoever. People are just assuming that person A, who has butted heads with person B in a thread, has given one star because they disagreed.

Perhaps there is also projection going on -- person B has one starred person A for the reasons given, and so they accuse person A of doing it when it happens to them.

I do know that the temptation to one star someone you don't like is quite strong. I admit I have been VERY tempted to one star someone who's got five stars for what is essentially a very empty post. I guess some people are more prone to giving in to temptation than others.

Again, very interesting conversation we have going here.

Originally posted by bodrul
this has been said many times (and i agree with it)
the new stars system will only faver those that have their peer backings to always give them high stars and their oponents low stars,

bring back WATs

Or just limit the number of stars like they did WATS votes and I think your problem is solved. People won't be so quick to use them if are limited. ( I would hope )

I wonder if the system could be set so that posts of less than a certain length automatically reduced your overall star count? And that no stars could be awarded by anyone to that post?

That might have an effect on all the one liners, and would stop the buddy system from giving 5 stars to someone who came back with really good post like "Great Post XXX"

That would be an auto star delete for the poster. Hell, make it so that person who posted such a short piece of nonesense couldn't get another star added for 24 hours.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
Excuse me? Where are you getting the information that I'm being a hypocrite? I brought up the problem. Just because someone assumes that I am one starring someone else's posts does not make it true -- there is no way of knowing WHO is doing this sort of thing.

I never accused you of one-starring people that you don't like. I'm accusing you of five-starring friends for one-liners, as a fellow member Implosion pointed out with a screen-shot.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunctionPersonal attacks get no one ANYWHERE.

Accusations and insults are sometimes a good reality check (not that I insulted you, i just said you were a hypocrite, big deal). Plus, they build character.

Le Sigh. I thought both the posts were denying ignorance. From my perspective they were.

And here we go with the accusations and the projections of what people thought other people meant by their starring a post, which is where my original complaint did come from.



edit to add:

And HERE is an example of exactly what I"m talking about. Someone went through the whole thread and 5 starred every post whether it was quality or not, and one starred mine -- even when one of the 5 star posts actually agreed with what I was saying. At least up until the point they were last logged in.

I am not crying or saying change it! change it! But I do use this particular thread to illustrate my point that there are some people being extremely childish with the starring system, and all because someone said something in some post somewhere that they didn't like.

That's why I say I'm with mojo, I'm not going to use the stars at all anymore. That way I can't be blamed for one starring anyone else, as I have been accused of here, nor for five starring people who I think did a good job and made good points and being accused of hypocrisy.

Obviously the temptation to be childish is too much for some people, or they think they are "teaching someone a lesson" by pulling down someone's average out of spite or personal dislike, and I don't want to be a part of it.

Too bad, too, the original idea of quality rating posts was a good one. I don't think it's feasible though because of activities such as I've mentioned here, and others have mentioned earlier in this thread.



[edit on 10-6-2007 by MajorMalfunction]

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
Le Sigh. I thought both the posts were denying ignorance. From my perspective they were.

Originally posted by Djarums
Simply put, the administration of the site put this forth asking for people to click the stars based on POST QUALITY. If you're clicking based on who you like or don't like... well, you're cheating yourself.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Quality is quality, regardless of whether we agree with a point or not.

We aspire to have the wherewithal 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.

Toward these ends, the new post-rating system provides a 5-star scale that translates to:

- A fair contribution to the discussion.

- A reasonably interesting contribution that helps the discussion.

- A solid contribution that moves the discussion along nicely.

- A fantastic contribution that focuses discussion on the important issues.

- A superior contribution with perception-altering potential, Denying Ignorance.

Post Rating System

Implosion, I am well aware of the post system and what the number of stars stand for -- others are not, and it is obvious from what they're doing, which as I said in my previous post is childish.

Like I said, I am choosing not to participate anymore because it is clearly being used by some people in a childish and incorrect manner.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction

edit to add:

And HERE is an example of exactly what I"m talking about. Someone went through the whole thread and 5 starred every post whether it was quality or not, and one starred mine -- even when one of the 5 star posts actually agreed with what I was saying. At least up until the point they were last logged in.

oopsie... well that was me. I automatically gave 5 stars to everyone. Those people who did not have stars, when I clicked on them registered Deny Ignorance and you already had a star or stars and when I clicked on you to give you 5 stars, it only took it up to the next level.

oh lol.... and I only did that yesterday as I read various threads.

Obviously the temptation to be childish is too much for some people, or they think they are "teaching someone a lesson" by pulling down someone's average out of spite or personal dislike, and I don't want to be a part of it.

well, no I just believe that everyone contributing here on ATS is denying ignorance So, in this instance, the one you point out, there was no ill intent or being childish. Just me, starring everyone to what I felt and unfortunately, when I clicked on your imput, as you already had stars, it only went up to the next level.









[edit on 10-6-2007 by NJE777]

OK, now I've illustrated my own point that things can be misconstrued! LOL

NJE

what stars do you speak of?

How can you abuse a system that is so ineffective to begin with? There are no points or other 'gain'. There is no way to accurately decide who did what. And there are at least a hundred ways to screw it up unintentionally.

This isn't abuse, it's a federal government idea that got loose in the wild.

are they ninja stars?