"Star" wars and a constructive solution.

reply to post by SirClem


I understand what you are saying and have seen it endless times in threads but IMO there really is nothing ATS could do to solve the problem..

You just have to live with the fact that nothing is perfect..

I think the key to this issue lies in understanding the star system, and the reason for which it exists. The intent of the star system, is that when a post contains good information, or is written well, or expresses an interesting and intellectualy advanced mode of thought, the membership can show thier approval of that post. The system is supposed to work best when people obey a very simple , but probably un written rule. That would be, only star posts which have real value, and not because they are posted by someone on your friendlist.
Also , ensure that you do not refrain from giving stars, just because the veiw that is expressed is counter to your position (I regularly star users who argue against my position, especialy when it is clear that thier arguments, while sometimes distasteful , are in fact of better solidarity than mine, which proves I have something to learn from them. Always a plus in my book).

The problem arises with this system, as with any other, when people ignore the spirit of the system and the reason for its existance, and behave counter to the ideal function of that system. When members star a post because it contains like opinions, rather than because the expression of those opinions is of superior or laudable quality , it skews the system , and makes it look foolish.

Personaly speaking, I star threads and posts which have something to offer the wider ATS community, rather than using stars as a back slapping machine. Also I use my star count on an individual post as a measure of how well I am arguing a point, how well I am able to introduce the members to information they have not yet had, and how well I assimilate new information from other members into my dialogue. If I get a good star rating , the chances are that the post which attained these awards is good, and must contain elements which ought to be observed and borne in mind when creating new posts or threads. The system helps me gauge my usefulness to the membership as a whole, and I appreciate the oppertunity to gauge that usefulness without having to ask a large sample of people, wether or not they enjoy, understand, or appreciate my use of language, or benifit from my input in some fashion!

The limiting of stars would be a bad idea in my veiw, because it seems to me that there are probably some posters whose specific knowlege makes thier posts worth more qualitaively than the posts of others, and while that may mean that they are starred more often, that ought to be a messege to others to raise thier game. I often observe my star count and think to myself "Perhaps there is something missing from your posts, time to get on with it and knuckle down to some serious thinking".

The real issue comes when people gang together and star according to similarity of politics or attitude, and that is tiresome and foolish. The inability of some members, to see that a good post may not always be plesant to read, can cause skewed star counts, and the practice of starring certain friends doesnt help.

Am I the only one who'll admit that when reading posts back to back that say the same thing, I'm more likely to give a star to someone I "know" that I consistently agree with?

In a situation where someone has less stars than a gold contributer but they're both saying the same thing, I might star the former, because he needs them more.

I'm not going to star a one liner - ever - but I'm absolutely guilty sometimes, of having a personal agenda when I star

I think the solution is to allow a star removal program - most sites have a thumbs up, thumbs down - and you don't need to give the thumbs up before giving the thumbs down - so unlike the "unflag" addition - you could remove stars from the "trolls", and at the end of the day it should balance out. I can't push this idea because I may be inclined to de-star someone I don't like too - but when you're looking at someone (for example) with 13,000 stars or more - my little negative shouldn't make a difference, or would it?

I do also want to point out that the threads I find most engrossing, are the ones I'm less likely to give out stars - I'm too busy reading and digging on the content to even remember stars exist.

I have the solution to the star system issue...here it is:




It should work...try it out...you'll be surprised!

reply to post by backinblack

No doubt I will have to live with it. It is only a suggestion, but I am not sure that some even understand what the suggestion IS.
I can live with it.

reply to post by jerryznv

Yes, that would work.
Maybe someone will kick it upstairs for us.

reply to post by Forevever

Thanks for the honesty.
I have been guilty of starring like minded members as well, and not starring very deserving posts for many of the same reasons you mentioned.
I guess WE are not perfect either.

reply to post by TrueBrit

Maybe Great Britain will be great again someday, and the U.S. too....
Thanks for the thoughtful post. The stars, in my view, are cheap but valuable at the same time. Free to give, but people sure put some value on them. And, they should. I believe it is a shame that we can't make them even more valuable by putting some limits, but it appears I am a minority of one.
Thanks again for the well written post, a star for you. (I will deposit it in your account at a later date.)

let me see....

SirClem F 1 S 198

Ah been here over a year and only 198 stars

So... its all about jealousy eh?

Now stop whining and leave our stars alone. Didn't you read the T&C where they explain that when you reach 100,000 stars you get a brand new Cadillac?




Now if they actually had any value, like being able to spend them in the ATS store... then maybe a limit would be something to look at...

reply to post by zorgon

Okay, I will stop whining. You look really tough and intimidating.
Your argument is weak, however.
No offense of course.