Where do all the stars come from???

reply to post by CuriosityStrikes


LOL, well I hope I am one of those members you star more than others.........JUST JOKING...

I know what you mean, that happens a lot.

reply to post by chapter29

You have 75012 points right now...good job btw...

Thanx..........

I try to make contributions to ATS.

reply to post by jkrog08


You are a superstar every day in my book and twice on Sunday.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


LOL........I am not sure how to respond to that, but thanks and it was funny.

reply to post by Jenna


Yea I figure it will all work itself out, especially if members keep bringing it up.

reply to post by jkrog08


You get this many ...



... for laughing at my funnies.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Howed you do that???

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

Howed you do that???

It's a secret!





it is also a jpg of a screenshot


HEY, you're not Skyfloating ... never mind ...

[edit on 9 May 2009 by schrodingers dog]

I have heard that most stars come from hollywood, however, I have also heard that many come from others places before they become stars in hollywood.

Stars can be found on the cover of people magazine, and US, and lots of other trashy rags on the newsstands these days. Some stars can be found wasted on drugs and some compromised from sex scandals. Many stars have high rates of divorce and marriages with many different partners leading to children out of wedlock, hence more child stars being born each day with a preponderece of these, again, in hollywood.

Many people, including great philosophers often ponder the age old question, how come stars don't burn out sooner?

Kidding aside....I have often thought that stars are not what the scientists tell us..but i'm also considered a right-wing extremist conspiracy researching paranoid maniac, so it's understandable.

One thing I have noticed is that if you stare at a star long enough, it moves eventually. (lol) Either that, or i'm moving, I can't figure that one out yet.

[edit on 10-5-2009 by videoworldwide]

reply to post by videoworldwide


?????


I guess that whole post was a joke right?

I find it richly bizarre that I would normally have just starred one of the posts that agreed with my point of view - in a thread discussing that very thing. So as yet another person to confirm: yes you are a superstar...

...but seriously. I generally do whisper my reply by starring a post that has expressed exactly what I had to say. If the stars came in catagories of "I agree" star and "great writing job" and "Fair comment, but disagree" I would no doubt use all three.

I could suggest:
1 star for 'I agree and have nothing further to add'
2 stars for Awesome post!

I Flag alot more sparingly than I star.

I wouldn't swear to it but a few months ago I think I got a 'star glitch'.

I starred a post and immediately about 5 stars came up, it was a bit hard to imagine that four other people starred the post at exactly the same time.

If memory serves, I starred another post to see if I could repeat it, and there were extra stars again.

I didn't mind, they were good posts.

Originally posted by CuriosityStrikes
I often find myself coming to a topic late in discussion, if while reading a reply jumps to mind I make a note of it and if later in the topic someone else has already made said reply I star it rather than repeating what's already been said.

Agreed, I do the same and I believe in part that is what the star system was made for. However, like anything else..it can be abused, with no easy way to prevent it from happening.
My beef is when a member posts the same argument later in a thread as a previous post by a member..yet gets all the stars.
Whether against thr rules or not..there is cliques here.

reply to post by jkrog08


Keep in mind that for every ONE post that is posted there are a HUNDRED readers of that post. That should explain the massive amount of stars.

Usually whats starred are either good posts, unique posts or extremist views, one of the three (extremist views because some dont dare post their extremist view so instead they star).

Stars a good indicator showing which posts are "Hot" (whether you agree with them or not).

Cliques? Sure. Cant be helped. But cliques exist for any stream, any view, any agenda.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by jkrog08

 

Cliques? Sure. Cant be helped. But cliques exist for any stream, any view, any agenda.

Iam aware of that, only pointing out that occasionally I see a minimal post, with a lot of what I'll call "atta boy" stars.
Like buddy u2u's all his friends and says "C'mon over to this thread and star me."
I realize mods have no control over this..just wish you did.
Guess I'm in a perfectionist mood today.

reply to post by AccessDenied


In my opinion having to ask for stars means your thread sucks

Of course, if you clearly notice any of this attempted manipulation, let us know.

[edit on 10-5-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by AccessDenied

 

In my opinion having to ask for stars means your thread sucks

Of course, if you clearly notice any of this attempted manipulation, let us know.

[edit on 10-5-2009 by Skyfloating]

Oh agreed.A heck of a way to make yourself feel important around here.
Sometimes with stars though, it's hard to pinpoint who is abusing the system.
You have to pay close attention, know who follows who around, and find a pattern.
Sheesh I feel like I just scripted a plotline for "Criminal Minds".
man..I need to get out more..

They come from the hands of the masters, some pets are motivated and will find ways to earn treats, others will beg for them. The end result is behavior modification which some call training through the use of positive reinforcements.

"Where do all the stars come from???"

Lets modify that question and see what happens.

Do all of the stars on member posts come from members alone?

How many stars can the staff and owners apply to a post?

There has to be a conspiracy here somewhere it is ATS after all.

I'm an outside observer!

Actually, I think we should have two different symbols..
One to give voice to a post, and one to indicate high quality/value.

For example, a post with "Good job man!" could receive loads of voice-stars, because a lot of people agree - but there would be no quality-stars, because there's no elaborate analysis or epiphany, etc.
A very well written post that takes the Devil's Advocate standpoint wouldn't receive a lot of voice-stars, but may receive a number of quality-stars.

Tell me what you think

reply to post by scraze


Well instead of voice stars how about gold stars? A five start system (lol, like a restaurant or movie).....It takes ten member votes to equal one gold star, 50 will get you five. The gold stars are for quality of work. The blue stars can be used for good points and stuff like that.

And maybe if someone gets 100 member votes all 5 stars turn to platinum!