META: Bring Back Actual Voting

COSIGN.

Kickstarter!

I want to see how high (or low) some posts get.  Limiting it to 5 up or -1 down kinda sucks.

I remember Brian mentioning sometime a couple months ago that he was going to change the voting system.  I wouldn't expect any changes to be made until the off-season though, when he has more free time.

cosign

You fools.  You must accept this "democracy" that is given to you...or you will be crushed.  Resistance is futile.

But, yeah, I like reading the unpopular comments too.  The semi-censorship now in place really accomplishes nothing.  Most of us have pretty thick skin and are comfortable with the internet and it's nearly-anything-goes ethos.

I totally agree and I'd be willing to pitch in if necessary to change it back.

I agree.  It's almost election time.  Let's start practicing.

Agreed. I hate this moderate button.

100% agree.  I'll donate $500 to help pay for the reprogramming costs.

I absolutely agree.  And to tack on a rider to this proposal, I'm of course going to throw in a request for higher minimums to post.  Most threads that get negged to bolivia are usually started by guys who have just crossed 100 and aren't aware of board rules (spoken and unspoken) and the general way things work here.  If we bring back real voting, a point threshold of 200, 250 or even 500 would be much more attainable by someone who is actually contributing likeable material to the board, yet more difficult to attain for the undeserving guys.

A quality newbie could theoritcally get to that higher point threshold and contribute more good content faster than the way it is now.  On the other hand, trolls that have been here for many years, or guys that annoyingly over-comment right off the bat to get to 100/500 pts, would not just default their way to the needed point total like they're able to now.  The board will make damn sure of that.

In general, allowing voting (and raising thresholds for starting threads) gives this board more of a ability to police themselves (which is a positive thing and something we've always done a decent job of) and it also makes the mods lives a bit easier. 

One of the great, self-policing aspects of this board was the ability to neg troll-like comments into bolivian, and to upvote those that were truly great or funny. 

I expect that the reason that Brian removed the old system was because of the level of acrimony during the latter part of the RR era.  Those that wanted RR gone were often negged heavily for expressing their negative views by those that defended RR.  The result of this was a point system that led to negging (or upvoting) based entirely on the view expressed. 

The discord and split in the fanbase that characterized 2008-10 is gone, however.  Sure, we don't all agree on everything, but the differences of opinion (i.e. Fitz should be benched in favor or Rawls vs. Fitz will be fine) are ordinary for any fanbase, and there is no real acrimony.  So, I personally see no reason not to go back to the old system that we all liked.

I like the Neg aspect of it, but it used to be a thousand GIFs and funny pictures in most threads getting upvoted like crazy, but those images kinda bogs down real discussion that takes place around it. 

and pluses. Also, hiding sucks. Too often, any idiot can come through and shut down a post--let everyone read them and decide for themselves--plusses and negs help give an idea of how people see them.

Is the bug that makes it impossible to read page 2 (and beyond) without opening a new tab ever going to be resolved?  That'd be nice.

Seriously. I really miss this.