The whole Flag and Star system that is unique to ATS is quaint and I like it. It kinda reminds me of facebook or something.

I understand that Flags drive a thread into the active topic list and then the thread will attract more views. And I understand that the Star system may contribute to how much weight any particular members opinion is given. But even under this potentially flawed system, wouldnt a views counter be nice?

I would like to see how many views threads get. I think it would be interesting.

Another idea that may improve the site would be 'Editor Picks' or 'Mod Picks.' It is not unusual for an interesting thread to pass through the New Topics list too fast for enough people to notice it. Many important threads do slip through the cracks while many troll threads dominate. Might not be a bad idea for mods to hand out Editors Picks on top of the whole applause thing.

But the main thing I am interested in is views. I wonder how many views a top thread would get? Thousands? It would be interesting to know. Anyone else interested in the view count on threads?

I believe a stars and flags system is better as views is fairly easily manipulated. People make careers out of doing the views and click count metrics. +Counting views doesn't really drive the same behavior. The stars and flags drive some level of analytical participation. Views can drive outrageous and immature posts rather than analytical posts. +A merely interesting title can get lots of views while stars and flags focus more on content.

I've also noted that there is no "anti-star" or "dislike" which is a positive overall as this promotes analysis instead of mere argumentative dissension. There's enough of that as it is!

Originally posted by BayesLike
I believe a stars and flags system is better as views is fairly easily manipulated. People make careers out of doing the views and click count metrics. +Counting views doesn't really drive the same behavior. The stars and flags drive some level of analytical participation. Views can drive outrageous and immature posts rather than analytical posts. +A merely interesting title can get lots of views while stars and flags focus more on content.

I've also noted that there is no "anti-star" or "dislike" which is a positive overall as this promotes analysis instead of mere argumentative dissension. There's enough of that as it is!

I would prefer a dishonesty button. But people would use it against me.

But I do find that the star/flag system has faults. Not so much in their implementation I guess, but who uses them, and why.

If I find a post informative or genuine in it's intent to do whatever is the opinion of the author, I star their post. If the content is worthy I flag the thread.

But there are a lot of "Heyy hippy happy groupy groovers, have a flag and star one me, blessed smiles and bliss!!" while ignoring everything about the content or intent, people around.

It's nice, but defeats the purpose.

I think the star system is there for a "Me Too" style reply, without the reply. But it can also be a "I dislike the guy you're arguing with, not much more than you however. Have a star." ...

Maybe a thread Karma system. Not governed by clicks alone.

Maybe that sleepy sloth has been sniffing around with his language heuristics and is relaying all his perceived 'star and flag' contenders before they hit that shiny icon, back to the chief. Maybe we can ask him to gauge the karma of a thread by how many hostile to happy posts there are.

*taps nose*