ATS Points & Star System Overhaul

reply to post by StellarX


No Probs mate,

I thought I'd explain my points situation in case you were referring to me, that's all. As I mentioned, i thought you may not be. Yes it makes sense in context now.

Thanks mate

IRM

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
ATS promotes positive and healthy discussion.
Someone saying "this post sucks!!!!!!!!" is not positive and healthy.

Exactly the reason why a 'red star' may avert people who say such things. if you read my initial post, I outline that exact thing. I think you have your wires crossed

If this was a good idea - i think the 3 wisemen would've implemented it already.

No one is perfect, no offense to the 3 Amigos. Everything is subject to change, improvement and evolution. It is simply ATS's way of conducting a web forum. This is not universal.

case in point
This thread, alone, would have a lot of red stars....that would do 1 of 2 things
Instigate a negative reaction out of you or Make you leave ATS

How can you even begin to guess my psychology. You are wrong in every account. I would not leave or over react. I do not claim to be all knowing and all seeing and I understand in the real world, we all see things differently. I willingly accept that fact and am very comfortable with it. Remember it's me who suggested red stars which means I'm happy to abide by them. I am not exempt.

Perhaps you are referring to how you would react in such a situation? I'm just guessing.

neither one are something we want to see happen.

For that last remark, I humbly thank you Andrew E. Wiggin


IRM

Originally posted by berenike

Currently 'hoax' threads are labelled clearly as hoaxes. Could 'troll' threads not be labelled in the same way?

Thank you for your wise contribution berenike. That is a great idea that I feel does not compromise the way that the 3 Amigos wish the forum to be run. It's merely an easily implemented extension of current practices and policies.

Well thought out!

IRM

[edit on 2-8-2008 by verylowfrequency]

reply to post by verylowfrequency


VLF,

My Man...

You must understand that unless people know you personally, how are they to tell you are joking. Perhaps with some of those electrodes you were referring to? Give some leeway to StellarX. To be honest it seemed to me that you were completely serious too!

Anyway, enough of the levity if that was your intention. I intended this to be a serious discussion. And if you were indeed joking, why not tell us what you really believe? Otherwise one can only assume that your previous post was a waste of space and other peoples time.

I await your true feelings on the topic backed up with the reasons why.

IRM

[edit on 2-8-2008 by verylowfrequency]

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
I think your reply to me is a perfect example why we don't need a negative star system. Your negative comment & twist on my words - where I was joking was enough negativity without throwing a few of your ugly stars on my post.

I'm such a big meanie! Lol.... Maybe this just isn't the right type of forum for you?

Maybe, instead of negative stars we could create a virtual reality suit with electrodes that allows readers to let authors know how they feel about what they just read and I could send you some jolts of electricity through your suit to let you know how I feel about your comments towards me.

No thanks; the worse i would ask for is the opportunity to sit you down and make you read the sources i would normally present in defense of one argument/view or another. It may make sense to teach things with small brains with the application of pain but to do so with human beings is mostly a open admission that you have no legal or humanitarian leg to stand on.

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
Maybe I should of added some

, but you have to be pretty gullible to think I was completely serious with this last sentence.

Maybe you should as apparently both of us were ....

Obviously your thread wasn't about me so infraredman

, I think it was pretty obvious I was in "character" and kidding or pretending in order to make a point.

Then i suggest you find a forum where such behaviour might gain more appreciation?

Stellarx - decided to obfuscate my sentence by taking it completely out of context and purposely took it as an easy opening for a personal attack - albeit diguised.

At least your paranoid so maybe we have a place for you here after all; that is in a few years time when your 'feelings' don't get quite so easily.

My response was very nice with another embedded joke as well that went along with the theme of this thread. Get it?

A 'embedded' joke no less? Wow.....

I could have made a harsher response, however I consider the possibility that there is a slight language barrier as StellarX is from South Africa and I realize jokes don't always work across cultures or maybe he just has an anal personality.

And your third guess would be? I may admit to some of the latter but the former isn't much of a problem as you might realise from reading some of my posts!

Now, I think I've made it perfectly clear what I think of your idea, but I'll expand if it makes you happy.

Very unlikely...

If people want to "dis" a post they can do it by taking the time to make their point in writing a response.

Which is ALL i do around here! Sure i think i can claim some success in warding off some type of commentary but at what cost does that come when there is so much endless repetition to address the same old nonsense?

Otherwise you would have hit & run negative posters adding nothing of value and it would attract more trolls itself - who might make multiple accounts just for the purpose of seeing negative stars by a post or poster they don't like.

So make different types of 'points' such as actual posting, thread creation, multi media production, tinwiki or whatever else and attach a point cost for various levels of 'disagreement' for the various types of points earned. In this way it should be possible for contributors to decide for themselves if they wish to offer positive reinforcement by staring the flag at no cost or negative reinforcement with a point cost attached.

Only the Mods have the power here to put negative points against a user for a post that was made and most of us would like it to remain that way.

While it's fine to trust administrative issues to a few who prove themselves impartial/partial to a given cause that's not democracy and not what you want if you want to form a true opinion of popular sentiment. Currently 'truth' is determined largely by who is present in a discussion and given the rate at which good information is buried by completely asinine threads it's as good as a full time job to 'defend' your view. That is not the way it should be as truth should not be determined by whoever has the most time to spend in it's defense.

Otherwise you have too many kids and trolls playing games or being childish.

The average troll have absolutely no stamina and the rest of the people you disagree with you can normally at the very least use as sound boards or reason to do additional research. The worse thing you can do is to restrict the potential for negative sanction in the hopes that the trolls who create countless threads wont somehow find a way to abuse this system as well. If the owners/admins can't deal with the varmin why not allow the townsfolk the protect themselves? I for one know how to use my pitchfork and i am sure i am not alone.

The point of STARS is to say - "Yes I agree", or "Yes I like it" without having to write a one line response that says "me too" that is frowned up here because it wastes time & space for everyone reading and that could have been used for better responses.

It is? So you can at no cost or risk to yourself give incentive to slackers such as yourself? Slackers of the world unite? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep most nonsense from ever getting posted thus allowing the information that remains to be judged? I know i would , if i could, rather disagree with what i find disagreeable, than to do the slacker thing and just flag/star it, but since there isn't enough hours in a regular day to wade trough the volume of nonsense that is produced here every day. I believe that there should be a way for me to use my past 'credits' to 'reward' the completely outrageous crap i sometimes run into without going to UFO/alien related threads.

While it's true many forums employ your negative mark idea and it may work for them, but I believe the process here is more thought out and works just fine as it is.

Sure you do and as you may have noticed i really value your opinion.

Stellar

[edit on 1-8-2008 by StellarX]

[edit on 2-8-2008 by verylowfrequency]

Originally posted by verylowfrequency

Originally posted by StellarX
snip

VLF,

While I value everyones right to an opinion. I am dismayed to see you resort to low brow tactics such as overt racism. Perhaps a deduction of 500 points from the Mods would be the most appropriate action against this major T&C violation?

If I had a red star, you would have certainly earned it with that last comment - joke or otherwise, it's in extremely poor taste.

Bad Form Mate!

IRM

Mod Edit - removed quoted material.

[edit on 1-8-2008 by elevatedone]

NO to negative-stars

Way too much potential for abuse. The debunking teams will ensure that the good researchers putting out good evidence get lots of negative stars, while debunkers and nay-sayers get lots of positive stars.

As for points, I've never really cared about how much points I have, but some changes to how points are awarded would still be nice to see. As it is now, trolls can rack up loads of points just by starting lots of controversial threads that get lots of replies - even if their threads are really crap.

Why not instead award points for starting threads, award points for every Flag a thread receives, and award points for every Star a post receives? That way, people are rewarded for the quality of their content, not the quantity....

I'd much rather see the ability to add unlimited numbers of users to my ignore list. There's at least 50 people I'd like to add to it at this point.

-Euclid

I think the system is fine the way it is.

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Exactly the point. I agree with you totally. Everything Skeptic Overlord said would make for an "excellent" system on paper. It just fails to account for one thing. Human nature. There are always going to be those who crave the recognition factor of higher point scores, and go out of their way to work the system to get them. They start threads of specious nature, with the only apparent goal being to generate replies. The idea that all the readers are going to restrain themselves from replying is just wishful thinking. Should we restrain ourselves? Yes. Does it work that way in practice? From the evidence I've seen, a resounding no.

Negative stars would be abused IMHO.

Points system is fine as it is, I preferred its predecessor but I am a minority in that school of thought.

Originally posted by Resinveins

There are always going to be those who crave the recognition factor of higher point scores, and go out of their way to work the system to get them. They start threads of specious nature, with the only apparent goal being to generate replies. The idea that all the readers are going to restrain themselves from replying is just wishful thinking.

Sadly, you are right. And I confess that I haven't always been able to restrain from posting in those kinds of threads.
Just yesterday I fed a troll. Served it a three course meal, actually. I am ashamed.

I say if it aint broke then don't fix it,this site seems to be running just fine under the current conditions,if we were to use everyones opinion would be a set of rules that would rival a dictionary

I think we should have a flag button for "questionable content".

When someone posts something up, especially political information, that isn't backed up by a verifiable source, the questionable content flag can be hit, and a mod can review it.

Too many times a blog will be posted with questionable material, but it is allowed to stay because it isn't necessarily breaking rules. At the same time, this questionable content sits there and people come by read it, accept it, close the thread, and never verify it.

If a post/thread can be flagged for questionable content, this would allow readers to know that they need to take it with a grain of salt.

I'm confused cany anyone explain why my points are in the minus?

Thanks.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
While I generally applaud the way ATS is run by the owners and site moderators; I do have a sticking issue with the Star & Point system. I believe it's time for an overhaul.

Red Stars:
I would like to see the implementation of "Red Stars". This would allow people to express that they disagree with a view expressed by a member within a thread. It doesn’t even have to be expressed with a graphic. Perhaps just a variable number followed by "Disagree with this point of view"

E.g. (15) Members Disagree With This Point Of View.


While debate is the intention of the forum, it may go some way in making things run in a more civilized fashion.

I like the red star Idea but I would like it better if the Anonymous / non-member posters were locked out of having this priveledge, otherwise it could have a trollish, negative impact on good posts.

Just a thought.


[edit on 11-1-2008 by intelgurl]