New idea for ATS forums (To the Mod's/Dev's)

Hello!

I've been using this website for several years now, much longer than I have been a member. I've noticed that once posts get to 3-4+ pages of responses, its hard for anyone to see your input (no matter how valuable it is) among all of the other posts.

Although this is not specific to ATS boards, I think I have a solution, or at the very least a new feature to make ATS more thought provoking.

I suggest giving sequential priority to posts with the most stars, within a thread. So when a reader is skimming through replies to an OP, they aren't hit by the first 10 posts that could theoretically (and more often than not) have no substance to add to the discussion.

However if I post 5 pages later something thats thought provoking and other members agree, based on the number of stars I attain for that post, my post would be moved up to the first page beneath the OP (assuming I had the most stars in the thread).

What do you think?

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
Hello!

I've been using this website for several years now, much longer than I have been a member. I've noticed that once posts get to 3-4+ pages of responses, its hard for anyone to see your input (no matter how valuable it is) among all of the other posts.

Although this is not specific to ATS boards, I think I have a solution, or at the very least a new feature to make ATS more thought provoking.

I suggest giving sequential priority to posts with the most stars, within a thread. So when a reader is skimming through replies to an OP, they aren't hit by the first 10 posts that could theoretically (and more often than not) have no substance to add to the discussion.

However if I post 5 pages later something thats thought provoking and other members agree, based on the number of stars I attain for that post, my post would be moved up to the first page beneath the OP (assuming I had the most stars in the thread).

What do you think?

I'd star your post fifty times if I could......

Has been suggested many times and rejected because it can a) be gamed and b) destroy the flow of a thread.

Originally posted by adjensen
Has been suggested many times and rejected because it can a) be gamed and b) destroy the flow of a thread.

How can it be gamed? You need an account to register a star. People creating multiple accounts only to star themselves? Seems like it would be a large waste of time.

I don't think it would destroy the flow of a thread. If it's relevant information it will be easily accessible. Sure everyone could have a star in the thread, but priority would be sequential based on the number of stars each post has. I'm not saying remove posts that aren't relevant or helpful, I'm just saying they wont clutter up the thread (which is %99 of threads unfortunately).

Not keen on the idea. Stars dont make a post any better or worse. Someone can have an unpopular view, but still make highly relevant and great posts. It would screw up the flow of a thread. Replying to another member and your post gets twice as many stars... people then have to bounce around like crazy to follow the threads train of thought.

It is a pain when threads get huge, but if you actually trust the star system just read the post with the most stars on every page. You wont really know whats going on, just ATS popular opinion. Meh.

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
Hello!

I've been using this website for several years now, much longer than I have been a member. I've noticed that once posts get to 3-4+ pages of responses, its hard for anyone to see your input (no matter how valuable it is) among all of the other posts.

Although this is not specific to ATS boards, I think I have a solution, or at the very least a new feature to make ATS more thought provoking.

I suggest giving sequential priority to posts with the most stars, within a thread. So when a reader is skimming through replies to an OP, they aren't hit by the first 10 posts that could theoretically (and more often than not) have no substance to add to the discussion.

However if I post 5 pages later something thats thought provoking and other members agree, based on the number of stars I attain for that post, my post would be moved up to the first page beneath the OP (assuming I had the most stars in the thread).

What do you think?

why would anyone base the importance of a post based on stars???? i see a zillion posts that hardly have stars that are stellar posts.....

and it would throw off the discussion completely....reading threads is like reading a book...you dont read a book by skipping around...you read from page 1 to the end....in order....

If this was put in place the really long threads would just have a bunch of funny pics and the best one liners as the first few pages. It sounds like a good idea but it would not work, plus if you look the most stars are always given on the first 2 pages and after that it just goes back to a couple stars here and there.
Then you have some posters that have little fan clubs that get starred no matter what they say.

I think it would screw up the discussion because many posts are responses to other posts and not just the OP. Just because you did not get any stars does not mean people did not see it.

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman

Originally posted by adjensen
Has been suggested many times and rejected because it can a) be gamed and b) destroy the flow of a thread.

How can it be gamed? You need an account to register a star. People creating multiple accounts only to star themselves? Seems like it would be a large waste of time.

You must hang out in different forums than I do

It doesn't even have to be the same person -- I see a number of posts that add nothing to a thread that get starred up the wazoo. Go to the "Religion" forum, find a new post by a theist, add some flippant remark along the lines of "the magic man in the sky is a bunch of BS anyway" and watch the stars role in.

Hey, I've just had a thought.

Rather than having positives that move a post up... why not have a "bad contribution" button?

ANyone who is anyone can tell when someone has added nothing to a conversation. The more (red flags, wrist slaps?) they get, their post gets reduced to hidden/spam status... and you have to click the "show" button to see it.

Actually, come to think of it, it's a bit like Youtubes system.

Thoughts?

reply to post by saladfingers123456


In a highly polarizing topic a response would get just as many "good votes" as "bad votes". The whole idea is great for commenting on a video but not so good for a discussion.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
Hello!

I've been using this website for several years now, much longer than I have been a member. I've noticed that once posts get to 3-4+ pages of responses, its hard for anyone to see your input (no matter how valuable it is) among all of the other posts.

Although this is not specific to ATS boards, I think I have a solution, or at the very least a new feature to make ATS more thought provoking.

I suggest giving sequential priority to posts with the most stars, within a thread. So when a reader is skimming through replies to an OP, they aren't hit by the first 10 posts that could theoretically (and more often than not) have no substance to add to the discussion.

However if I post 5 pages later something thats thought provoking and other members agree, based on the number of stars I attain for that post, my post would be moved up to the first page beneath the OP (assuming I had the most stars in the thread).

What do you think?

why would anyone base the importance of a post based on stars???? i see a zillion posts that hardly have stars that are stellar posts.....

and it would throw off the discussion completely....reading threads is like reading a book...you dont read a book by skipping around...you read from page 1 to the end....in order....

edit on July 11th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)

edit on July 11th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)

Yet it's hard weeding through a 100 page post to get to the meat of the topic with what others have researched, and posted on. I'd bet there are far more posts starred, that have great insight and research vs the posts that have zero stars. It wouldn't stop people from reading a thread that intrests them, it would just allow people to read the posts most agre with first.

But, I'm not blind to the fact that websites are based on page views. I can't tell you how many times I don't bother reading an entire thread because of the number of posts make it overwhelming.

There has to be a solution.

reply to post by Ryanssuperman


What you are suggesting is like reading the cliff notes version of War and Peace. You may get the overall gist of the thread...but, all the nuggets that give the topic substance, would be lost.

Des