Suggestion for flag voting system enhancement

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Sometimes you are too late for a thread and it's 50 pages
Sometimes you don't participate in a thread but would like to get a general consensus of the outcome
Sometimes people flag stupid stuff
Ditto for good stuff

I think it would be useful to see a total flag count at the top of the thread for both. However, it would take some ingenuity to come up with an algorithm to determine how the flag corresponds to the discussion. In or out of favor. I doubt your programmers would have the time to think something like this out, but it would most likely involve a few dynamic arrays cross referencing each member's flag based off the very initial flag in the thread.

Would be cool to see. Anyone else able to think up a way?




posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   
You mean like a poll or something?

I are confused? >.<



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FlySolo
 



I think it would be useful to see a total flag count at the top of the thread for both.
Sorry? Both what?



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Ya sorry, it's a bit confusing. When people flag its usually either for or against a certain idea or comment. so yes, a polling system.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by FlySolo
 

Dear FlySolo,

Unless they've changed their minds recently, management is against the idea of any negative indicators, whether flags or stars. I'm not sure I agree with their reasoning, but they seem pretty firm about it.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Also you can sometimes flag a topic just as important without caring about the OP's opinion on it I guess.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Omg second double post this week
edit on 9-8-2012 by Pinke because: Double post



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Pinke
 


I flag and star stuff when I dont agree with the poster all the time. A well written response or OP thats thought provoking no matter how wrong (*cough* how much I disagree) still deserves to get credit. Good point pinke.

OP I see what you mean now. I think it would be interesting but also abused.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


I goofed in my title. I meant to say star. But it's ok when you star others that you disagree with, It can't really be abused then. It's still a polling system.



posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I know what you mean. Sometimes I flag things because I agree with the OP, sometimes I flag it because I disagree, but want to bring more attention to it for discussion.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
But it's ok when you star others that you disagree with, It can't really be abused then. It's still a polling system.


Why would you star a post you disagree with?

Confuddled...



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by FlySolo
 


So basically you are just saying you want something like an anti-flag? Not going to happen



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Superhans
 


You missed my point. I'm not saying an anti-star/flag system. I'm simply asking a way of showing the trend of a particular thread statistically. For example, a UFO thread with 50 pages. Which way is the thread leaning in regards to member's opinions. Hoax, believable, not buying it, on the fence etc..., then finally an overall tally to what the final outcome is.

The algorithm for something like this might be extremely complex because there are so many varying opinions. It would be hard to determine the outcome based on just words so it would need to be based off of how many stars are accumulated for each arguing side.

Make sense now?



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Maybe wouldn't do an algorithm, maybe just have the ability to add a single 300 character comment with your flag or something like that with a meta data part to it. IE ... so all flags with the category 'disagree' are thrown together.

Really though it just sounds like a poll. ATS's infrastructure supports polls I believe so I think they've not implemented that functionality for a reason, and it's unlikely to be introduced.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
reply to post by Superhans
 


You missed my point. I'm not saying an anti-star/flag system. I'm simply asking a way of showing the trend of a particular thread statistically. For example, a UFO thread with 50 pages. Which way is the thread leaning in regards to member's opinions. Hoax, believable, not buying it, on the fence etc..., then finally an overall tally to what the final outcome is.

The algorithm for something like this might be extremely complex because there are so many varying opinions. It would be hard to determine the outcome based on just words so it would need to be based off of how many stars are accumulated for each arguing side.

Make sense now?


It kinda already works that way, A UFO video with 50 pages and two flags is probably not leaning towards legit. Im sorry it is a bad idea through and through, if you look at conspiracy sites on the web this one here is like the diet version. Something like that would really just put it into the fisher price category. I mean think about it, its like you can't even be bothered to read and form your own opinion but you need some sort of voting system to tell you what to think?



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Superhans
 


It does work that way, when no one flags a thread. That's kinda obvious yes?
50 pages is bound to attract more flags and stars than just two, so you're not being realistic. And you are also correct about not wanting to read 50 pages of nonsensical remarks when the star system goes sideways. Why bother adding anything when it's futile?

But thanks for your opinion.





top topics
 
0

log in

join