Sorting posts in a thread by number of stars???

Here's a short one for you - no star required. Negativity!!!!!!

Why are these board requests popping up for negative this and negative that?? Intolerance is ignorance IMO!

Originally posted by yeahright

Nope, sorry there isn't any way to do that.

Thanks for letting me know.

Perhaps consideration can be given to adding such a function?

If members are rating posts, it seems worthwhile trying to maximise the ability to utilise those ratings.

I have a workaround I use, though. Maybe it'll work for you. In the big threads, I'll sometimes run across one member who seems to really have a grasp of the subject matter and some excellent insight. I'll use the "posts in thread" option which sorts out just that member's posts. Frequently, there'll be enough quoting going on that you can get a real good feel for what's gone on in the thread.

Thanks. I use the "posts in threads" option fairly often already - but you have to know which member to search for...

All the best,

Isaac

Originally posted by facelift
reply to post by 2manyquestions

 

Sorting by the number of stars, you're relying on others to tell you what is and isn't "good" content.

What a rookie assumption...you now know what other members want out of a thread..? The mentality on this thread is amazing - once again those who are not thinking outside of their own world need to reevaluate what this site is...


It's a place for an individual to go to look at content in any way they choose...if I choose this option, am I preventing you from reading the thread the way you want to..? No...


Some weak responses on this one...

The OP can look at a thread in any way he/she wants. If you choose to organize your threads according to the alphabet, response time or whatever else, that's your choice to make. It was my opinion that by looking only at replies with the most stars, it wouldn't always get him/her the most "informative" content first.... something the OP was looking to get via the method mentioned. It doesn't take into account that the most recent responses could contain good information, but would not yet be starred by other posters.

By the sound of your reply it seems like you're very passionate about the subject. Is there really a need to be condescending? When I'm wrong I'm willing to admit it. Rudeness isn't going to win you any arguments with me.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
It was my opinion that by looking only at replies with the most stars, it wouldn't always get him/her the most "informative" content first.... something the OP was looking to get via the method mentioned. It doesn't take into account that the most recent responses could contain good information, but would not yet be starred by other posters.

A fair point.

I could easily add another half a dozen reasons why it would not be appropriate to rely SOLELY or ALWAYS upon viewing a thread sorted by the number of stars. For example, some posts get lots of stars because they are funny in the context of the debate so far, but are meaningless on their own. Also, in a long thread attracting a large number of flags, the OP tends to get lots of stars - even if the OP basically just raised an issue or pointed at a relevant article/video/photo without really providing any analysis or insight.

But, once again, I'm not proposing that this approach is the only valid one or should always be adopted - merely that it MAY be useful and I'd like to test its usefulness if such a method is available (which it seems is not the case) or if it could easily be added (which may be the case - I simply do not know, but in an attempt to raise this issue with The Powers That Be I sent a U2U to SO a day or so ago).

We could debate how useful this approach would be - or we could test it.

On this issue, I tend to favour experimentation over debate.

Don't you think that there MAY be room for reducing the amount of reinvention of the wheel on ATS or potentially making more use of the input from members in the form of stars/flags/posts?

All the best,

Isaac

reply to post by IsaacKoi


I have no problem with anyone wanting to experiment. It's good to see something in action to learn whether it proves to be useful or not. I'm only pointing out the potential downside to the method.