posted on Jul, 21 2010 @ 10:27 PM
i star and flag, impulsively, based on whether i agree with the poster's stance, assuming there are sides. if there are not, i star and flag based
on how interesting the information is (relevant to ats ... which these days, actually includes almost every topic imaginable). if it's a link to
news or an article posted elsewhere, i often think about whether anyone else would have come across this info or how much the poster added to frame
the presentation in a way in which people would be interested in discussing it.
however, like previous posters, if i disagree with the original poster or have an issue with their post, i will still flag/star if they have taken
lengths to create a dialogue, monitor the thread to maintain constructive communication or continue adding information.
i confess that if i like a thread, there's little distinction to me between starring it and flagging it. obviously, i want it to be featured, so i
will flag it (and perhaps please the op if they covet stars and flags). and i will star it if it appears the op did even the slightest work to create
and i flag threads that are silly to me if it's clear the op worked on it. i have spent some real time on a thread or two and know that some threads
have hours of work behind them, even if it turns out no one seems to appreciate them ... so i try to acknowledge that.
i star posts, generally, if they said something i would have said or something i wish i had said. i rarely star posts i disagree with or that are
stupid and/or ignorant. every once in a while, though, someone with whom i disagree will post something that is pretty thoughtful or highly
constructive in which case i am compelled to star.