It's better already:
Great posters: returning.
Message Board: Readable.
Urge to smash my computer: Reduced.
It's better already:
Great posters: returning.
Message Board: Readable.
Urge to smash my computer: Reduced.
Clarkie just absolutely nailed it in a nutshell.
And as a reward for his insightful comment he got a brand new, shiny upvote from yours truly.
The board has already been noticibly more pleasant. Brandon Brown even had a thread that didn't devolve into pointless flamebait(!). It's been great
Best part is that I haven't seen a comment from that Gnarly Face guy in days
Amen to that.
Brian and BiSB had him taken out and publicly banned according to the state run MGoBlog. He was called a "traitor for the ages"
It gives you an "access denied" when you try to pull up his posting history
I was looking forward to watching him get downvoted like crazy.
In the meantime, it amuses me that your username is straight out of GoT and the first reply to your comment was by a Jon Snow. +1 to both of you for your usernames.
My fantasy baseball team was named, "Dire Wolverines." When is the next season/book arriving?
Moderating MGoBoard had to be just about the worst job ever for the past several months. Now, I think our intrepid moderators will have a bit of an easier time, leading to fewer ragequits. This is important because keeping the peace around here is a key difference between the smart and passionate MGoBlog crew and the insufferable dweebs on other sites.
While the voting has likely helped, I think that some of the trolling was due to losing. Without a loss this week to bitch about, there is less attraction for trolls. There are also less substantive posts to troll.
Behavioral changes the voting systsem won't change: me not wearing pants. Neg all you want, I ain't wearing 'em.
At a time like this you call for pants?!
Now, if HIS comment also said 'iPhone', the pantlessness would certainly be more interesting.
or it didn't happen.
now I'm confused.
Is it "points system" or "pants system?"
is there such a thing as an insightful snowflake?
Maybe lurkers will feel obligated to post more as if you just neg you could spend your points so you can't vote/post anymore, at least the ones that have enough points to do so.
I personally don't upvote the meme-y stuff unless I think it was really clever, but you may see a lot more of that from people trying to earn points cuz y'know its like money you can't spend.
WRT the jokes, I expect that the people I find funny will continue to be funny, and for some of them, points might even prod them to go the extra mile, which seems great!
WRT to gamethread dilution and such, I don't necessarily think that moment-to-moment thoughts really need much accolade, and insightful/useful information does more attention.
I think there will certainly be vocal contingents that share a (generally) popular opinion on the blog that others disagree with, but I don't think it will change the landscape of the forum/blog any from what it was 1, 2, 3 or 4 years ago.
Definitely agree with the gamethread point. The majority of those posts (I do it too when I join them) are just stream of conciousness ramblings. Like "Damn" or "Great play", not really thoughts worth more points, as they don't really leaad to good conversation.
Yeah, I definitely believe that de-emphasizing game thread posts relative to those that people actually read is a positive step.
I will continue to lurk mgoblog with limited functionality. Although the quality of the comments has already gone up noticeably IME.
I have to agree with you 100% on this. I really don't care about point totals (you can see mine), but there has been a increase in the quality of posts and threads in general. As this change coincides with a relative lul in sports-related things to talk about, we'll see if this trend continues as people get more to talk about with the basketball team's performance and whether or not the football team can execute in the bowl game.
I think the quality of posts has already improved considerably.
But I thought the rule was like fight club.
If you hold a contrarian opinion, and want to not get negged just becasue people disagree, include a gif of an adorable animal with your post.
I think that we are doing a decent job developing our O-line, and we will improve with time.
See. Now people can't downvote it. Because they don't want to be the asshole who downvoted the adorable puppy.
Putting in crowd-pleasing humor that overshadows crowd-souring opinions. An excellent test to see whether humor prevails over disag...ooooooh, a GIF!!!
"Scouring" a pretty generous term. I agree with most points of this post, but I wouldn't make it seem like a highly critical piece.
take that downvote and shit on your theory.
LET TOTAL CHAOS RUULLLLEEEE
you're a monster!
That adorable polar bear is dead. (It's Knut, who died in 2011 at age 4. Drowned in his enclosure as a result of an encephalitis induced seizure)
It really has had an immediate impact on the relative amount of trolling in the last few days. Some of the people who were very good at walking the line in that they trolled but not in a banhammer sort of way are getting what they likely deserve now. There are a persistent few, but there are some familiar names that I have not seen as much or at all in a few days now.
I will say, the "karma" system made trolling apparent in that you would look for masses of grayed out posts as a place to start reading, but it didn't really punish anyone unless they were caved or sent to Bolivia on a temporary basis. The advantage to this system is that it forces people to think a bit about downvoting (as it costs a point), but it does punish the trolls in a more precise way and limits their ability to vote and even post at all to some extent.
One of the most frustrating things under the old downvoting system was that having a different opinion than the general MGoPopulation would mean that your comments would be hidden with a lack of regard for the validity of the comment. Hopefully this new system alleviates that problem but I think that anytime you have a group of people together, you'll be vulnerable to groupthink.
True, but somebody who regularly comments in ways that resonate with the board (and thus get upvotes) will see their point total increase faster than those whose opinions don't resonate as much. The latter group may not get downvoted, but they will see their point total increase more slowly relative to posters with more popular opinions.
Obviously, this isn't a hard and fast rule; bald pandering probably will wear thin over time and posters who can articulate disagreement well will always be valued by at least a portion of the community. That's why I am not particularly worried about a "hive mind" here.
was excessive in the old days when it was free; several well-articulated opinions were mobbed with downvotes if the mob mentality got ahold of them.
I think the one-point toll for downvotes will curb the exhiliarating and undiscriminating generosity with which some folks used to throw them around.
Mob mentality is not the same thing as majority opinion. Conflating the two has been going on for a while on a board, and it's tiresome.
If your opinion is unpopular, it's probably not because you're the victim of groupthink. It may be the case that the majority feels differently for legitimate reasons. Or perhaps your opinion is uninformed or just plaind dumb.
There are many that share the majority opinion, which is fine. But there are inevitably some posters who like to "stick it" to the guy who is voicing an unpopular opinion, and they feel emboldened to do so because they know most people on the board agree with his opinion (even if he is being a complete dick about it).
My opinion is any sort of internet forum is prone to groupthink. Because we're a group of like-minded individuals...and humans inherently want to protect their group. So any dissenting opinion has a greater chance of being "flamed" for the sake of the majority opinion. Now, most people don't act this way on this blog, but there are some. And they were obnoxious this year.
I think MGoBlog has generally been one of the better forums out there in preventing the "groupthink" mentality, and this voting system was the biggest reason for that. Because there are many intelligent posters on this board who will downvote the guy who says "FIRE BORGES" the billionth time because, dude, we get it. Shut up.
And by the way, just because it's not a popular opinion doesn't mean it's uninformed or just plain dumb. That's kind of exactly what groupthink is...assuming that a small minority who disagree is always wrong and dumb because, hey, they don't share the majority opinion.
I guess you missed the part where I very clearly and specifically made the effort to state that unpopular opinions are not automatically uninformed or dumb. So congratulations, you set up a straw man because you either didn't actually read my comment or read it and managed to get my meaning exactly backwards.
I am assuming that your intention is sincere, but the way you led with "it majority feels differently..." and then closed with kind of the back-handed "or you're just stupid" kind of came across as saying "you're probably just stupid". I think CompleteLunacy was elaborating on his point and giving fairly realistic examples. JMO.
But I'm not going to use kid gloves. There are plenty of uninformed, irrational opinions spouted by people who then bitch that "groupthink" is holding them down, man. Yes, maybe I could have phrased my meaning slightly differently, but I thought I was pretty clear.
also plenty of legitimate and articulately-worded opinions that got bombed by people that thought downvotes were to be used as a sort of popularity contest.
It could be any of the three.
Stupid opinions are common on the internet (and IRL).
Groupthink is an actual scientifically-proven phenomenon. I certainly think that it exists on this board, the same way that it exists in almost all social settings.
And of course, sometimes its just majority rules. But not everyone is casting an up/down vote. Generally, people only vote on things they really like/dislike. And the mood of the voters depends on the general tone of the site. Two years ago, we loved Borges. Last year, we were split, but a Keep Borges post would probably not have gotten hammered because even the Fire Borges guys didn't feel that strongly about it. This year, a Keep Borges post will get you negbanged because more people hate Borges and the ones that do hate him do it very passionately and are more likely to down vote rather than silently disagree.
if you honestly think that the attitude towards Al Borges is purely contingent on the tone of this blog and not on what happens in real life, then you just aren't paying attention to football. I don't know what else to say.
I just used the Fire Borges thing because it is a hot topic around here. It was the same with RR, CC, etc. It can be anything. If Blue is Good is the majority opinion, someone who says Red is Good doesn't really deserve a neg so long as his opinion is founded. Only really fanatic Blue fans/Red haters would care to actually vote on it. That's all.
I suppose you knew that. Not everything is a Borges apologia.
caved for a short period of time, but that eventually enough people would vote it back to a positive number. That isn't a counter for the hive-mind, but there is no real cure for that other than disconnecting your modem.
I can deal with just about any of the negatives if it helps the mods to take out the trash.
And that's an advantage of the new system vs no voting. There are enough "good guy" posters willing to up vote someone who was unfairly negged that trolling down voters can be offset.
Without the votes, the "down vote troll" guy would instead post a stupid "you're a moron" comment that could not be punished without mod action (since responding would feed the troll).
Trolling will decrease.
Those of us who are terrified of being negged may not post as often.
An increasing number of user pictures may include cute animals to elicite upvotes.
Where's the 3-point line? I got pretty good range.
Hive mind is already being reduced. Now that my pretend points are at risk if I neg someone, I've found myself actually trying to relate with an opinion contrary to my own, whereas before, I'd rashly neg them and move on. So I certainly hope this new point system is in fact encouraging contrarian (yet reasonable) opinions.
As for your 3rd point, I did and still do support an increase in minimums. With the unlimited posbang system, a troll or an inexperienced mgoblogger can sit in the shadows, post 10 or so superficially great comments and then be able to create terrible threads. I do believe that having to wait it out until they get to 500pts or so would take them long enough so that at the very least they would then be familiar with the overall feel of the blog and would be able to properly sympathize with the general populous (a MGoStockholm Syndrome, so to speak...).
I don't know that an increase in the minimum to start a thread is really needed. While the scenario you raise is certainly possible and may ocassionally happen, I don't remember that being a big problem the last time this moderation system was used here. This system isn't perfect, but it does cut down on trolling within threads, which should free up the mods to concentrate on quickly recognizing and deleting "terrible threads."
Good for removing trolls. But bad in a big way, in that the point system ends up leading to mob-rule and group-think. Minority dissent, or anything that goes against the common wishes and desires of the average M fan, inevitably gets voted down. Typically, down-voters say they're doing so because the dissenter "didn't make a good argument" when, in many cases, the dissenter simply disagrees with them.
And now, as evidence, witness the down-voting of this post.
I would respectfully disagree. You're always going to have disagreement (like right here for example) but your conflicting opinion to mine is not worth a downvote because there's nothing in your post that warrants it. You've expressed your opinion and I've expressed mine. And I dont want to "spend" a point to downvote you. I'll just type instead.
What it limits, IMO, are posts like "the point system sucks and everybody who disagrees is an idiot" type thoughts. Those DO get hammered so my contention is disagreement becomes presented less disagreeably and our reasoned discourse becomes more civil because of it.
You've expressed your opinion and I've expressed mine. And I dont want to "spend" a point to downvote you. I'll just type instead.
Your attitude is the right one to have, but I'm not sure everyone shares it. We've already seen some posts get voted down despite not containing anything objectionable, because (apparently) people simply disagreed with them.
Most posts should not get downvoted. The reasons for downvoting should be basically:
1) it's clearly trolling - the poster obviously is trying to just annoy people
2) it's overly hostile/argumentative
3) it has something offensive/objectionable
Most posts do not fall into these categories.
Those bastards should be bombed to Bolivia! Gosh damnit, I'm a frickin' spirit guidin' coyote from space! And I have the voice of Johnny Cash!
Speaking of Cash, isn't that a verse from "The Highwayman?"
I don't know anything about phsycology, but I'd guess that the "I lose one if you lose one" will actually help reduce the amount of people who just run through and generally disagree. I don't know it it will improve constructive response, but I'd say that "reasonable but dfiferent" posts might have more protection than they used to.
I think the fact that it costs a point to -1 is actually helping. What you'll mostly see is popular opinions at like +20 and contrary opinions mostly unvoted upon. If you get too hung up on your mgopoint total, that would lead you as an individual to post 'group-think' ideas in the hopes of boosting your mgopoints but I haven't really seen that be the case amongst the MGoProletariat. There are contrary ideas being posted right now that aren't negged unless someone is just posting it in a 'dickish' way
the minus one for downvoting will make a difference in sorting out recreational downvoting from serious and principled downvoting.
I'm not sure, but if I recall correctly, Mgoblog has never had downvotes cost a point before? If I'm right, the future stretches out beyond our imagination.
Edit: Oops, now that I hit "save" I see the queue of comments all saying the exact same thing I'm saying. Well, here's one more vote for the minus one for downvoting.
Just be yourself.
Many of the posters in the past couple of days joined Mgoblog in 2010 or 2011 or earlier. Most of the trolls seemed to be recent joiners for the sole purpose of trolling. At least that's what I've noticed. I think this is a promising development.
I think we'll have a lot more POS-BANG threads now that POS-BANGING has more of a meaning. We already have two today and it's not even 12:30.
I think we'll also have a lot more posts that don't contribute much at all, just posts trying to be funny or with a Kate Upton gif because those always get upvoted.
Those are the two slight negatives I can think of.
I also think we'll have a reduction in trolls, because now that you can lose/gain points for the quality of your posts, peope will be less willing to be assholes/trolls because their imaginary internet points will disappear.
I also think we'll have a much faster rate of information being posted to the board. Everyone's going to want to be that person who posts the next "Hello: Jabrill Peppers"-esque post to get all those sweet, sweet, MGoPoints so people will be racing to post whatever information they can find that will get them those points. That potentially means more double-posts, but also more information being posted to the board.
I think the amount of posbanging/posbang threads will likely decrease once the novelty of the new moderstion system wears off.
As for the reduction of trolls, is that really a bad thing? The trolls have made the board nigh-unreadable for the last few months, we need a way to decrease them, and this seems to be a good way to do it. Do i think we need to get rid of contrarian opinion? Absolutely not. But people who troll just to troll do not add anything to the site.
Maybe I worded it unclearly, but I meant to imply that losing trolls is a good thing. My first two points were negatives, 2nd two positives.
I hope you're right about the psobanging threads wearing off though.
We generally have a friday open thread/posbang thread and a drinking thread later at night, and I'd guess in a week or two it'll return to the status quo there. Two posbang threads in one morning is weird, but the second is invoking patriotism, and thus will not be negged.
Be right soon plz, a third one just appeared
The posbang threads are usually pretty easy to pick out and ignore. The trolls were feasting on the quality threads most of us want to read.
the real tests will be tomorrow and the bowl game. if the snowflakes threads don't end up in drunk rage territory, we'll know it's really worked.
for about a year until yesterday. I was tired of reading the fighting. I registered rather than leaving after seeing the effects of the voting system.
I look forward to getting to the 100 points so I can start threads. As an example I saw the top recruiting post on 247 yesterday but could not start a discussion on it. After I reach that level I won't worry about how many points I have. I will post when I feel I have somethng to contribute. I won't worry about being negbanged for an unpopular opinion but if I get to wrapped up in an argument and get negbanged I'd definitely reconsider my posting.
I think it's a great tool for the mods which is the important thing.
1) Could actually encourage people to post who hadn't before, since incentives are up.
2) Will DEFINITELY encourage most thoughtful posts, rather than "what is in my head at this very minute." On second thought, so an internet board, maybe not, but one can hope.
But seriously...in general this is a slow time for the site...I have to admit to following more closely just because of this change. I'm less likely to post about meta than sports as I think most posters are.
I'm looking forward the BWW bowl to see if this changes behavior or traffic.
The points system has had the standard effect: less trolling and more groupspeak. I'll take that trade-off any day.
I don't like the tendency for people using the neg button for letigimate Michigan fans who disagree with their opinions, but if it makes the board more civil, it's worthwhile in the long run.
And I believe that the return to the points system of yore is a tremendous move for this website. Tremendous.
Where I was going to respond to a user in agreement, but then caught myself from posting a completely inane response in favor of just upvoting them. In my mind, this has improved the quality of threads.
While points generally cause some form of groupthink, the nice thing is that I think there are enough responsible posters to understand how to properly use it, so maybe you don't come out the same as someone else, but once you get to a certain level you're talking relative numbers anyway.
Also, there will be a lot more gifs and funny pictures. There will probably be more poor attempts at humor in an effort to gain some upvotes. Trolls will be more limited. More posbang threads even after a while, but the number will decrease eventually. Probably more "Rah rah!" type posts, but those are better than negative nancy posts.
Lastly, in a socially weird but not at all surprising way, the point system will make people at least come together to a degree and not be such jerks to others. There is no longer a need to reply in snark to make a point for every post (guilty myself). There is no longer a need to get into a long chain of arguments, though that will still happen and sometimes rightfully if it's a good and legit debate. Strawman arguments will drastically decrease. And I can finally give a +1 to posters I agree with, which in turn makes me feel good like giving someone a Christmas present, and therefore I'm a happier person and post happier things, and generally the world becomes a nicer place because of a point system on a blog.
threads on the first page of the Board. Substance? Non-existant. Wild point accumulation? Absolutely.
In the end, we have revealed to Brian our true nature. We are all point whores.
[EDIT: Department or Redundancy Department. I see that many posters have made the same point while I was wasting time looking for this spiffy image.]
Have to keep the images and gifs in a favorites folder or something, otherwise people will beat you to the punch. Welcome to the new age, to the new age, welcome to the new age, of the point system. It's dare I say, radioactive (that didn't make any sense, but for some reason when I started type "welcome to the..." the rest came out, for that I am sorry).
I think it's mostly a function of
a) novelty because it's been gone so long and
b) nothing is happening in M sports right now. Hockey's off for 2 weeks, basketball hasn't had anything of note happen in a few weeks, and football is off a few weeks.
Once basketball and hockey get into Big Ten play, I think you'll only see the normal weekly posbang
How will it affect behavior? Bend over and I'll show you . . . POSBANG!
My hope is that the frequency and quality of the photoshopping and gif creation will get back to 2010 levels. The Lloyd Brady and Brian Cook photbombing photoshop threads were awesome. Lloyd Brady hugging Jesus in 'The Last Supper' brought me to tears.
Impact of a downvote is disproportionate on those with a relatively small number of point compared to those whose count is in four or more digits. I probably delete four or five comments for everyone that I submit because upon reflection I decide that it does not meaningfully contribute to the discussion. As a result I have relatively few points, so the decision to downvote someone requires a higher level of offensiveness than if I had thousands of points.
In the same fashion the impact should someone downvote one of my comments is far greater that it would be on someone with thousands or tens of thousands of points. So rather than adding a comment supporting an opinion with which I agree it is much quicker to simply give them an upvote and reduce the number of downvote targets from those who hold a contrary view.