Making Facepunch better - Don't post about ratings
5,003 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Starpluck;48149908]I manually removed ratings. Thinking of changing some other stuff around here.[/QUOTE]
you tyrant
i feel like removing ratings is actually right away a major improvement to SH. prevents bandwagonning / burying or invalidating other people's opinions, and should also lessen the number of people just trying to make jokes on the first page.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;48149908]I manually removed ratings. Thinking of changing some other stuff around here.[/QUOTE]
Just wait until you see what he has in store for Fast Threads.
Don't like this. Being a SH reader who skims through thread looking for informative posts ( say a hot topic like Greece, I as a not politically informed person have no idea what the deal is about, but some knowledgeable person explains shit perfectly ) which often pretty much put the article in layman's terms ( think science threads and then JohnnyMo comes and does his shit and suddenly whole facepunch is collectively smarter) or just adds some good relevant info about what's happening. Or just some nice puns which I can distinguish just by looking at ratings.
Now if you take away that I have no interest in reading other posts other than OP just because I can't be arsed to read everything just to find something interesting or funny.
Another thing is when browsing SH threads the most popular rating behind thread title was a pretty sweet way to gauge whether the thread was actually worth opening.
In a hurry so a shitty paragraph but I hope I got the point across-
You're a loose cannon, Starpluck. Any more of this and the commissioner'll have my ass.
Ratings whoring is pretty bad in SH but I would have just restricted it, say agree and disagree only. That way nobody uses winner and dumb for those roles.
I don't think removing ratings is going to stop SH from being a cesspool of angry back-and-forth...
Wonder how this'll pan out. Either lots of change or absolutely none at all.
[QUOTE=usaokay;48149952]Though removing ratings in SH won't stop me from making jokes.[/QUOTE]
See I'm mostly worried that threads will get cluttered up with "LOL" or "excellent post sir" because ratings have been removed.
How about we introduce a custom rating in the Sensationalist headlines forum, just a "notable" rating or such.
Something that can't be used negatively, but can be used to mark a notable / informative / helpful post.
There are three reasons for this:
- I tend to quickly browse through most threads while looking at ratings to determine whether or not a post is worth reading in full.
- It's nice to have some sort of feedback on your post, especially if you did put some effort into it
- Eliminating "I agree" and similar replies.
[QUOTE=RejectedPost;48149960]I don't think removing ratings is going to stop SH from being a cesspool of angry back-and-forth...
Wonder how this'll pan out. Either lots of change or absolutely none at all.[/QUOTE]
it'll probably make SH a bit better in terms of it's really just a place of personal opinion. ratings didn't help for those people with their certain opinion who weren't afraid to speak their mind on a topic.
[QUOTE=lavacano;48149965]See I'm mostly worried that threads will get cluttered up with "LOL" or "excellent post sir" because ratings have been removed.[/QUOTE]
More people 4 me 2 ban
[QUOTE=paul simon;48149972]How about we introduce a custom rating in the Sensationalist headlines forum, just a "notable" rating or such.
Something that can't be used negatively, but can be used to mark a notable / informative / helpful post.
There are three reasons for this:
- I tend to quickly browse through most threads while looking at ratings to determine whether or not a post is worth reading in full.
- It's nice to have some sort of feedback on your post, especially if you did put some effort into it
- Eliminating "I agree" and similar replies.[/QUOTE]
The problem with using only a select few ratings is that people start to substitute those ratings for the ones that existed.
You want to eliminate "I agree," but "helpful/notable," would become synonymous for that rating.
We should probably keep two or three ratings at least. Agree, disagree, informative maybe?
The idea of a part of Facepunch without ratings feels weird.
[QUOTE=lavacano;48149965]See I'm mostly worried that threads will get cluttered up with "LOL" or "excellent post sir" because ratings have been removed.[/QUOTE]
then ban those people?
making a post when you could just rate someone is bannable anywhere on the forums
[QUOTE=Starpluck;48149985]The problem with using only a select few ratings is that people start to substitute those ratings for the ones that existed.
You want to eliminate "I agree," but "helpfu/notable,l" becomes synonymous for that rating.[/QUOTE]
On second thoughts, yeah, that probably would happen.
A lot of people already just use dumb interchangeably with disagree pretty much everywhere anyway.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48149979]More people 4 me 2 ban[/QUOTE]
fair enough
[QUOTE=RejectedPost;48149993]On second thoughts, yeah, that probably would happen.
A lot of people already just use dumb interchangeably with disagree pretty much everywhere anyway.[/QUOTE]
Only for really badly made points, usually.
[QUOTE=RejectedPost;48149987]We should probably keep two or three ratings at least. Agree, disagree, informative maybe?
The idea of a part of Facepunch without ratings feels weird.[/QUOTE]
Wasnt the first part of the forum to have no ratings, mass debate had no ratings and every post had to be weighed in on its own merits. Then the RC ratings went because some idiots were using the place as a soapbox to post random garbage as a means of getting attention. Now the SH ratings have gone, and we're now left with what is essentially a second mass debate, with more loose rules.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;48149985]The problem with using only a select few ratings is that people start to substitute those ratings for the ones that existed.
You want to eliminate "I agree," but "helpful/notable," would become synonymous for that rating.[/QUOTE]
With a singular rating it's very hard to communicate your opinion.
A worse post will just not have many ratings, and will appear as "less interesting" instead of dumb or bad.
I get why ratings aren't available in mass debate, but I'd like the convenience of ratings to stay in SH because it's a different and very useful subforum.
In my head this would work well and be convenient, but I obviously can't know for sure.
Maybe 2 new ratings could work? Something like "good post" or "bad post", a way for people to rate a post they like or dislike. Or maybe that idea mixed with only having agree and disagree, so someone can like a post without outright agreeing with it.
I don't get it. Was there a problem with having ratings or something? It seemed like things were running smoothly to me.
Who asked for this?
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;48150042]Maybe 2 new ratings could work? Something like "good post" or "bad post", a way for people to rate a post they like or dislike. Or maybe that idea mixed with only having agree and disagree, so someone can like a post without outright agreeing with it.[/QUOTE]
If the intention is to abolish bandwagoning, having ratings that represent clear opinions is a bad thing.
[QUOTE=paul simon;48150054]If the intention is to abolish bandwagoning, having ratings that represent clear opinions is a bad thing.[/QUOTE]
If the intention was to abolish bandwagoning, they could maybe only display the given ratings after an amount of time has passed?
I understand removing ratings in SH like "Funny", "Zing", "Winner", "Dumb", and other ratings that encourage puns/derailments/arguements but I wouldn't see the harm in keeping ratings like Informative, Friendly, Agree, Disagree, or Useful.
I think keeping a few ratings would be useful. Maybe just "funny", "agree", "disagree", and "informative"
That would allow someone skimming through to see if a post is bringing up something informative or summarizing affectively. It could tell someone what the general consensus is. Ratings can be an important tool. If you are someone uninformed on an issue, and you see a huge wall of text, you want to know what to believe. If it has 20 informative ratings, you can believe it. If it has 20 dumbs, or disagrees, it is probably bullshit. Ratings have a purpose. They are a useful tool for reading the forum, not just for bandwagoning.
[QUOTE='[sluggo];48150085']I think keeping a few ratings would be useful. Maybe just "funny", "agree", "disagree", and "informative"
That would allow someone skimming through to see if a post is bringing up something informative or summarizing affectively. It could tell someone what the general consensus is. Ratings can be an important tool. If you are someone uninformed on an issue, and you see a huge wall of text, you want to know what to believe. If it has 20 informative ratings, you can believe it. If it has 20 dumbs, or disagrees, it is probably bullshit. Ratings have a purpose. They are a useful tool for reading the forum, not just for bandwagoning.[/QUOTE]
"Funny" ratings encourage people to derail the thread with puns though. I agree with what you said about ratings backing up whether a user's comment is a worthwhile contribution to discussion or not, though.
Problem is, it's impossible to ever completely get rid of bandwagoning. You could at best forge a compromise by keeping limited ratings, such as those which were already discussed, or leave the forum as it is and more strictly enforce the rules about pointless posts like 'excellent post lol'.
But then we've got another problem; remember those posts in SH with a (generally bad) joke followed by 'in all seriousness, but....' and something related to the article? We'll probably see more of these and more widely used as well, unless you're going to turn a blind eye to that.
How will i know whats a good post when all these pixels are gone impeach
If we were going to keep some ratings, Disagree shouldn't be included imo. Having a post with a shit ton of disagrees would have a similar effect to dumbs, as it would just be considered the "wrong" opinion. Agree could be kept because you can agree with something without having anything else to really add. If you're going to disagree with something, you should be able to actually back it up with reasoning in a proper post, though.
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;48150091]"Funny" ratings encourage people to derail the thread with puns though.[/QUOTE]
Sensationalist headlines has never just been a place for serious debate. Probably half the threads there are meant to be humorous. You aren't going to have a meaningful discussion on the geopolitical climate because a guy in florida did meth and tried to fuck his cat
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.