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
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.
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
Now, I think I've made it perfectly clear what I think of your idea, but I'll expand if it makes you happy.
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
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.
[edit on 1-8-2008 by StellarX]