Anti-Stars

Hello ATS,

I'm sure it will have been suggested before but I would like to put it forward again. Please can we be given the ability to negative star posts, primarily so that Trolls can be clearly identified. Sometimes an ignorant post makes me so mad that I want to rage on the person and I think I would find it far more gratifying if I could just give them a negative star instead, so that all future posters know to ignore the village idiot rather than get annoyed by them.

Cheers.

reply to post by michael1983l

The problem is that ALL viewpoints on ATS are minority viewpoints, regarded as trolls by the vast numbers who don't agree with them.
The religious people think the anti-religious are trolls.
The anti-religious think the religious are trolls.
And that applies all across the board.
To oversimplify, if ATS has ten different viewpoints, all of them are in a minority of 10%, so all their posts will get drowned in the anti-stars of the other 90%.
That is why the "negative star" approach won't work. It would be a good way of enforcing a consensus, but there isn't a consensus to be enforced.

It would just be viewed as another star. A prominent skeptic would get as many anti-stars as stars making the whole thing pointless.

Originally posted by michael1983l
Hello ATS,

I'm sure it will have been suggested before but I would like to put it forward again. Please can we be given the ability to negative star posts, primarily so that Trolls can be clearly identified. Sometimes an ignorant post makes me so mad that I want to rage on the person and I think I would find it far more gratifying if I could just give them a negative star instead, so that all future posters know to ignore the village idiot rather than get annoyed by them.

Cheers.

I disagree, adding a negative just dosnt seem right to me, primarily because it will be abused. In my opinion its far more constructive to have just a positive system. If you dont think someone deserves a flag or a star then just give your view and move on.

A much more freindly approach I rekon.

reply to post by DISRAELI


In that same way the Star system does not work and should be removed then. Stars are not just rewarded to people because you agree with them, but mainly because they have put forward a well thought out and well written statement. I often star people despite not agreeing entirely with what they have said.

I would still like to give negative stars though to those that are just damned right rude.

How about an Agree (Gold Star) and a Disagree (Unhappy Face) or similar. That way when you post a point of view, you can get a quick gauge on it's like/dislike

I find the whole FB Like system to darn PC and feel that one should know weather they are doing something that is accepted or shunned.

Just my 2c, Dislike this post if you disagree

Why don't we just become Facebook?? We don't need likes and dislikes here. The star system can and has been argued for years, pros and cons, it has all been said. It works fine.

Yeah but then you get Bozos like this...
en.wikipedia.org...
Who would then collectively have a pretty potent tool to use for an agenda.

The lack of stars and/or flags for a post or thread IS a negative. In the recent threads list, while searching for a thread to view, it shows the replies and flags. Obviously, a thread with 200 posts and 3 flags shows a lack of 'positiveness' from the majority. As well, a post with few or no stars, the same. The system in place seems to naturally weed out and expose trolls or the more non-agreeable opinions. IMO the negative stars are not needed. A reply to the offensive post or comment can surely express your opinion.

Seriously, I myself was a total jerk when I started posting on this site. But with patience from ATS, other members example and replies & comments (and some of those stars and flags) I came to realize, we all have opinions. Some are good, some are not. I don't have to be rude to get my opinion out there. If I would have been banned for my terrible behavior in the beginning, I would not have 'matured' and come to enjoy the essence and information the ATS members bring. If I would have continued being an a$$, I would have eventually been banned at the worst. At the least, I would get negative replies to my posts. Either way, eventually I think most of us figure it out.

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by DISRAELI

 

In that same way the Star system does not work and should be removed then. Stars are not just rewarded to people because you agree with them, but mainly because they have put forward a well thought out and well written statement. I often star people despite not agreeing entirely with what they have said.

I would still like to give negative stars though to those that are just damned right rude.

One man's rudeness is another's denying of ignorance. This has been discussed MANY TIMES on ATS and the ultimate answer has always been: No. The reward system is a positive one, not a negative one. If you don't like it, ignore it. It's an extremely popular viewpoint.

I would like to suggest that stars & flags work just fine, particularly over the long haul. Sure, once in awhile someone might award another a star or flag for a reason you yourself deem unjust, but the bottom line is that these indications are bequeathed upon you by other members. You don't exactly "earn" them; other people must decide that you have earned them. Now, if you decide "stars don't work," then what you are saying is that all your fellow ATS members are stupid and star people for the wrong reasons. It's kind of a slap in the face to everyone else here. Except for you. You do it correctly. See where that leads you?

I believe that most people follow what you have suggested, that stars are deserved for a cogent post whether or not you agree with them. If I see someone has put a lot of time and effort into a post, that deserves a star. I know I've spent an hour on a post before. That represents a serious commitment of the waking day. So if I see that effort I'm willing to recognize it, or for a point I did not know, or a source I never would have found. I'll also star a post if the poster has the guts to buck the trend. Lots of people claim stars foster GroupThink. Personally, I'm much more willing to give a star to a contrarian. For example, on a thread bemoaning 'Poor' Private Manning for all this troubles in post after post after post if someone posts, "The guy is a traitor and deserves what he got." that takes guts to put yourself out there in a scenario where ATS' sentiment is largely in favor of Manning and you know the guy is going to get slammed for it. He'd "earn" a whole lot of negative stars if they could be given, and why? Because he does NOT agree with Group Think.

I'll tell you how I use them. If I see a guy with 5,000 posts and a Karma score of 100, I'm going to pay attention because this guy has a good reputation and I will give him the time of day and the courtesy of a full read. If I see a guy with 5,000 posts and a Karma score of 10, then I'm probably going to ignore him because he makes a whole lot of throw away posts that are not deemed valuable. Most of the time, however, I don't even look.

But as for a negative star. This comes up every month or so, and the answer is always the same.

each post should be read and judged as it is written and by what material is contained. The star system as it is now really means nothing, consider if a post gets many stars- does that mean it's not a troll, or that it's genuine information in some way? Couldn't a disinformation agent add up stars easily by saying 'all the right things'? Therefor, the flag and star system as it is now really holds no bearing in the minds of the wise who would be certain to search for nuggets of wisdom/truth, rather than allow multitudes of strangers on the internet to identify it FOR them..
The same logic applies to a negative star/flag system which you propose. Also, as a 'negative' meaning it would generally be totally abused most likely, but mainly the logic I applied above should be enough to explain why the idea has been put down since the dawn of ATS up till now ( and probably forever more ).

I do not think this is a good idea, It will cause people to give a negative star to some-one just because some-one is right and they are wrong (This is the internet so yes, people are that petty) Also it will cause arguments and if some-one makes a witty comment towards some-one well they would probably be on the receiving end of a negative star so i do not think it will work.

Cannot see any good coming of this.

Probably want to be able to block people you don't agree with also, want the ignore tool back also?

I sense anger in your posts OP, anger for not being able to silence people who you deem a troll..

It makes you so mad when people say stuff you don't like.. Well the mods have a pretty good hand of cards dealt to them and any posts that is off topic or against T and C gets removed.. Let them handle it and go on your merry way..

Happy new year

Not a good idea.. I could give anyone that I disagree with, or disagrees with me one.. Over the years, that would be everyone!

notice how many flags you did not get for your thread.
consider that a black star.

reply to post by michael1983l

I'm sure it will have been suggested before but I would like to put it forward again. Please can we be given the ability to negative star posts,

No you cannot.

Again, No you cannot.



As per Schuyler...............

This has been discussed MANY TIMES on ATS and the ultimate answer has always been: No. The reward system is a positive one, not a negative one. If you don't like it, ignore it. It's an extremely popular viewpoint.

If 'negative stars' were even allowed, I would want them to be invisible to everyone except mods, but we already have an alert button for this.

The only purpose I would see is highlighting someone when they are very rude but not quite breaking the rules or similar. Like a 'soft alert', but even then it would just be a popularity contest.

If I may toss in my couple pennies to the pot.. I think one of ATS's greatest strengths is the near 100% non-political way it's run and moderated. If a point pisses one of us off, we can safely BURY the guy with a well reasoned, researched and sourced reply to utterly destroy the silly argument made .... assuming all that can show it is silly or wrong of course.

It takes work and I've been known to literally take 30-45 minutes on a single reply when something rubs my fur the wrong way ...but so long as I've kept it professional and out of the personal range, I've never had one tagged either.

Of course...I've made a foe or two that way, but by the time I'm putting that much effort into a reply? The foe was already made. I'm just confirming it with a fitting response... lol

(I'm also feeling much better and not stewing on it after putting the time in to work out the reaction.)

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
If I may toss in my couple pennies to the pot.. I think one of ATS's greatest strengths is the near 100% non-political way it's run and moderated. If a point pisses one of us off, we can safely BURY the guy with a well reasoned, researched and sourced reply to utterly destroy the silly argument made .... assuming all that can show it is silly or wrong of course.

It takes work and I've been known to literally take 30-45 minutes on a single reply when something rubs my fur the wrong way ...but so long as I've kept it professional and out of the personal range, I've never had one tagged either.

Of course...I've made a foe or two that way, but by the time I'm putting that much effort into a reply? The foe was already made. I'm just confirming it with a fitting response... lol
(I'm also feeling much better and not stewing on it after putting the time in to work out the reaction.)

I think Wrabbit your couple of pennies in the pot explained the concern quite well.
Also, I think Pinke ^^^ above makes sense regarding the alert button, most definitely.

However, regarding Michaels orginal request....

Originally posted by michael1983l
Hello ATS,

I'm sure it will have been suggested before but I would like to put it forward again........ primarily so that Trolls can be clearly identified. Sometimes an ignorant post makes me so mad that I want to rage on the person....... and I think I would find it far more gratifying if I could just give them a negative star instead, so that all future posters know to ignore the village idiot rather than get annoyed by them. Cheers.

I added the emphasis to really understand what it is that you wish to accomplish. The flaw is that simply adding negative stars would not be full-proof in identifying Trolls. Maybe in your mind, but, ATS leaves that impression up to the poster/reader. One's opinion may not entirely agree with another, so to kind of identify something YOU don't like or agree with, well, gratifying for you, but the discerning reader, will most likely want to read and judge for themselves what is valid, stupid, irrelevant, etc.

I am not disagreeing with many posters who are just plain rude, off-topic or nonsensical, and I think the MODS do a pretty good job of addressing infringes of ATS T's&C's when 'Alerted'. Then you wish to be the ruler who can be the 'holier than thou' to ordain some other poster as 'the village idiot'. Not an intelligent, civil or acceptable way (just your own 'gratification) to acknowledge or demonstrate either YOUR disagreement or YOUR displeasure about a post. Safest way is to simply ingnore the thread and move on, but if you feel compelled to state your displeasure/disagreement, present it as such, as succinctly as you can, so others then can read your alternative view...........and make their own decision to read on, move along or contribute.

I am not trying to be argumentive. I think you raised a question and reasoning behind it, but after understanding it, I sense the majority of contributors to the thread, including myself, feel the current available options are suffiicient. Still, you deserve kudos for trying to think out-of-the-box, but for now, I say the way the forums process currently works is well and sufficient. Just adding some additional pennies to Wrabbits pot. Regards, ID

There is probably enough egotism on ATS already. It is sometimes off putting. When some people make threads just for S&F, knowing they have ''followers'' and garnering ego points along the way, for others reading a thread, half of it is wasted with people saying how great they think the OP is, instead of making any valid point.

Because of this I often read the OP and the last few posts then decide if any of the rest is worth reading, if I come across a few ''____ did it again, well done blah blah etc'' then chances are every page has some and therefore a high percentage of the thread is wasted drivel. Perhaps if they sent a pm singing their praise it would make threads less tedious to read.

There are also far too many haters on ATS for any validation of their hatred of any view other than their own, often closed minded view, using a negative star system.

ATS should be more about quality of information than point scoring.