150 Stars for 2 Lines in a Post..Are You Freaking Kidding Me?

page: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Lol, I read that thread a few days ago and when I saw how many stars your response got I honestly read it like 4 or 5 times to see what I was missing. I felt like the post was an enigma, no rhyme or reason to it, maybe that should be added as one of Sublimecraft's unexplained x-files.




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Hey... a smash and star grab thread


obligatory second line!



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I like to eat pie.

I also like cake too.

I also like this thread.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I completely understand what you're saying and I feel at times people star comments based on poster name alone.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Stars may be out of hand but I think it is just an agreement on what was said. People add a lot of good input on threads and I for one like to give them a pat on the back for that.

But maybe a change would be good. Personally I don't give a rats butt about stars but it would be great to be able to give more away. I see a lot of good content that deserves more applause and less stars! Maybe there could be a limit to how many stars we could give in a day or/and when you do you lose one. Would make people more stingy with their stars.

Sublimecraft can have all mine too for the best stuff I have read on ATS for months!!! www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 9/18/2012 by restlessinMT because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 


You are entitled to your opinion regarding S&F's but that was simply not my intent.

If I didn't know better I'd suggest that you think I can see into the future and that I knew from the outset that all these S&F's were suddenly going to start flowing in.

Get a grip...........you are seemingly overwhelmed by the green-eyed monster.

Consolidating them in one place - ATS/my profile. No contradiction unless you read into something that is not there - and you are!

One reason, but certainly not the main one, I did it over three posts was this.......

2nd post query

But the main reason was commitments to family after being away for so long - plain & simple. I literally started this thread just before leaving the ship and finalized part 1 when I got home and before the wife and kids got home.

Feel free to check out my profile and past posts - no malice or ill intent with me - I assure you.

45 minutes is what it takes me to gather the info, verify its validity, find the appropriate pics, upload etc etc - I'm sure you are aware of this?

Another reason was needing to talk to extended family in Barbados about #10 before I put that in. Look I had a myriad of reasons but those are all that's relevant right now.

Believe me, my ego is not hurt one iota...yours is a different story. Whining 5 times over two different threads about this is really obvious to me. I know this has been a bane of contention with you - including the 404'ed post earlier on today where you commented again about this thread and my copy/paste situation.

We will have to agree to disagree regarding my intentions here I'm afraid. Your frustrations are acknowledged by myself.
edit on 18-9-2012 by Sublimecraft because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
It deserved a star from me. There are many other thread IMO that do not deserve the stars they get. Because I missed the post you are talking about initially it just got one more from me
I am far from a star happy poster, but I give them when I think they are deserved. In this case the post certainly does at least for me, and I guess a whole lot of other ATS'rs!



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
WAY Above Top Secret


A hall of fame of the top-50 highest-flagged and often-starred contributing members on AboveTopSecret.com, displayed with a link their most-recently authored topic. Visit the threads of any one of these members (by clicking on their username) to find some of the best "alternative" content anywhere.


The 'WATS' index, evidently, stands for
W ay
A bove
T op
S ecret

Skeptic Overlord explains the formula.

So....while it may not matter to some or maybe even all...it does matter as far as what the site owners intend it for and for visitors who are looking for some of the 'best "alternative" content anywhere.'

The stars aren't for popularity or even agreement...they are supposed to mark quality posts...and flags, as another poster pointed out, are for threads that need attention paid because of the importance/relevance/timeliness/etc of their content...the stars for QUALITY of content.

It is a reader-driven quality assurance type mechanism...ideally, that is.

I agree 100% with jude11...he is a quality poster, imo...but the post he's talking about is NOT what makes him a quality poster...a quality member, yes...but the stars and flags are about contributing excellent content that should be seen by all who visit this forum if that's what they are interested in...a way to weed out the best from such a HUGE member roster.

We didn't always have stars and flags...when I joined 7 years ago, there was no way of pointing out excellent content that wasn't mod-influenced...which I don't think would be a problem as far as impartiality but the fact that the site owners considered that it might make things less objective and not as serious is one of the reasons this is a great site.

Personally, I only flag topics I think deserve attention or exposure and star posts that are meaningful and are a little different than the rest of the thread...ones that SAY SOMETHING...that jump out at me...and even ones that make me spew my coffee onto my computer screen...funny can be quality, too, mo.

edit on 9/18/2012 by queenannie38 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
I feel the same way about random unfunny comments on other forums across the Internet. Countless people will love and praise them, compliment on the user's beauty if she's a girl, and make a general simpering fuss. And there I am, wondering what in the world is so clever about the quip in question.

I'm called jealous if I speak up. Hey, maybe I am, at least a little. It's hard not to be when you take a long time to type up your own comments and edit them over and over (I'm a perfectionist), only to have them be ignored in favor of mindless natter. I guess people really do just prefer simpleminded entertainment.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


Read the first thread and now looking forward to this!

Great stuff OP...Keep it up.

Peace



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by jude11
 

Who cares about getting "starred"?

What is this kindergarten?

Please star if you agree.


edit on 17-9-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)


I've always wondered myself why people care so much about stars. I understand the importance and usage of flags, and despite normally visiting ATS from a touch-screen phone (which, being more than 2 years old, my thumbs are too big to reasonably do, but I do it anyway), I try to remember to flag the occasional really great post. I rarely "star" anything because the 12 attempts it takes to hit the star instead of the "this post" link is not worth the effort.

What do stars "get" you? I really may be missing something, I know there is a lot of functionality I don't know about ATS (for example, what is the "W" in the stats?) anyhow, maybe there's a good reason besides "weee, look at me, I have a lot of stars!" if so, I'll gladly start using my power to star more, as appropriate.

I don't disagree with the premise of the OP at all, I'm just wondering whether the stars really matter at all.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by dogstar23
What do stars "get" you? I really may be missing something, I know there is a lot of functionality I don't know about ATS (for example, what is the "W" in the stats?) anyhow, maybe there's a good reason besides "weee, look at me, I have a lot of stars!" if so, I'll gladly start using my power to star more, as appropriate.


KARMA (K)
I’m indebted to member Sherlock Holmes for figuring out these formulas. As far as I know, ATS management has never been explicit about the scores. I believe Sherlock may have back engineered the formulas mathematically. I’m not really sure. In any case,

It's ((stars * 15) + (flags + applause) * 10)) / posts. So if you take the following example you get:

7466 stars 3979 posts 524 flags 87 applauses
((7466 stars * 15) + ((524 flags +87 applauses) * 10)) / 3979 posts
(111990 + 6110)/3979
118100 / 3979 = 29.68, rounds to 30

So the K score is 30. Note that the overwhelming variable here is stars, which are multiplied by 15. You get much less for flags (starting threads) or ‘exceptional’ posts that earned applause, both of which are multiplied by ten. Applause, which can earn you 500 points a whack, are counted the same as a single flag here. So right off the bat flags and applause are worth two-thirds of what stars are. But the whole thing is divided by number of posts, which means the more posts you have, the lower your Karma Score. If you had 5,000 posts instead of 3979, your Karma Score would be 24. If you only had 2000 posts your Karma Score would be 59, twice what it is. Therefore, making posts that do not earn stars is to your detriment. It is better to make one pithy post than two throw-away comments that don’t add to the conversation.

WATS (W)
It's (number of posts ÷ 600) + (number of flags ÷ 80) + (number of stars ÷ 170). As an example:

(3979 posts / 600) + (524 flags / 80) + (7466 stars / 170)
6.63 + 6.55 + 43.91 = 57.09, rounds to 57

So this Wats score is 57. Here you see an opposite (and far simpler) sort of formula. Here stars are worth half of what flags are and posts themselves are worth about an eighth of what flags are. Flags are dominant. Here nearly 4,000 posts earn 6.63 points and a mere 524 flags earn almost as much at 6.55 points. But since there are so many stars, even though they are worth half of what flags are, it still gives a boost. But clearly, flags, earned for starting threads, is the dominant theme here. Also, in this score posts don’t hurt you because they are added in, not a part of a ratio. In the previous formula, lowering your post count raised your score. In this formula, lowering your post count lowers your score. There are some problems with the WATS score. It doesn't really do what it was designed to do and rewards longevity. It will always go up so all you have to do is stick around. Karma, on the other hand, can go down the more unrewarded posts you make.

No, it's not always "fair." This post will earn me far fewer stars than my first post in this thread, but people were just rewarding my joke. My stance is that you ought to take these as a very coarse measure of how well you are doing. I currently have a 2:1 ratio between stars and posts. If I fall below that ratio, then, to me, I'm not contributing as well and probably tossing off posts no one cares about. In other words, I'm wasting my time. That's a queue to me, not you. If I see someone, like seabag, who has a 5:1 ratio I may a bit more attention to him because his posts are usually pretty good. If you have a low ratio, particularly a low K score and are bitching about stars not meaning anything, then all that means to me is that I need not pay attention to you.

Your mileage may vary.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


Sumbuddies gut a secret admirer in the mods.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I came here looking for stars and instead i found
a milkyway... it was very yummy
edit on 18-9-2012 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Yeah, totally agree with what you say....

The threads with so much hard work get next to no response or stars and flags, but the one liners written on the toilet get millions.....

Remember the thread the other week that gained over 90 flags but gave absolutely nothing regarding the misleading time traveller thread title?

Really pi**ed me off that did................



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by restlessinMT
 


Yes, I think you, as-well-as the other posters who pointed this out, are correct.

I remember a thread a while back about 'General Back-Scratching' posts and how they are completely un-needed and pointless.

The thread went on to point out that submitting a post to the OP, or any other members active in the thread, that said, 'I like your thread, Thanks' is frowned upon and is exactly why the star and flag system was implemented. If you like the thread or post and want to tell the OP, give a star or flag it.

Keeping that in mind, the original thread in the 3 part series was popular and left many members interested in what was to come. It was a perfect platform to see Jude's post blown up with stars.

Entering a highly anticipated sequel thread, then scrolling down to see a post that expresses the same feelings as the general membership, presented the perfect opportunity for members to use the star system as it were designed to be used.

I am not suprised at all to see Jude's post receive a similar number of stars as the OP. It's because a high number of people really enjoyed the thread OP and starred the author. Those same members would have scrolled down and shared the same feeling as Jude and acknowledged those feelings by awarding a star, instead of writing another post that would have been overly redundant.

Could you imagine turning all Jude's stars on that post into 2 line replies that say the same thing? It would look as crazy as a 2-line post garnering 150+ stars! I'm sure there are probably some of them around ATS archives



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   


What do stars "get" you?


I like stars because they tell me I made a good post.

But sometimes star are really for popularity and can be misused. Such as when an antisemitic posts gets a lot of stars or when a Christian post bashes atheists that get a lot of stars.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 


That makes sense. I personally feel weird if all I do is contribute a voiceless flag or star with no actual input, though. Even if all I would be able to offer is a general comment of agreement or praise.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 

The Internet just seems like one big popularity contest at times. I try to remind myself that it's the equivalent of being a rich person at a country club winning a debate about yacht brands while surrounded by a small group of admiring onlookers, and try not to make a big deal about it.
Then I experience the rare long line of stars on my posts, and all that goes out the _ Yeesh.

(Sorry about the two-posts-in-a-row.)
edit on 18-9-2012 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TechVampyre
stars and flags are extremely pointless.. Either your post is relevant or it is not.. A star is not going to change the context of the post..
in a long thread though... I tend to skip over the lower starred post... not really letting people think for me... it's just I think there's a higher chance someone might stimulate my brain who's already stimulated many others or said something worth some weight. Ya know?

I do more lurking than anything and a way to keep my self glued to the site is being able to pick out the interesting... and fun reads versus something... less titillating






top topics



 
24
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join