Thumbs up on the new point system
This post is adapted and carried over from a response I made to UMFootballCrazy's "thumbs down" diary. So many posters seemed to be focusing on the potential abuses of the system that I wanted to make a more public pro vote for the attempt at point grading, thus this thread. I think the attempt is a positive development whose potential for abuse is outweighed by the potential benefits that can accrue.
Brian's attempt here is to prevent the board from devolving into an M Live or Freep type board, with trolls and idiots posting daily and hijacking conversations. If McFarlin or his descendants post intentionally or unintentionally stupid shit, this system may help more than simply "manning up" and writing a post. If 10 people do that's great, but if another 10 don't have something original to add but still want to express their displeasure with the opinion, the point system will help show how a larger cross section of the board feels about a post. Some of you guys who criticize the WLA or other "cliques" on the board should like this--it may show that disapproval or approval isn't limited to the first 5 "cool kids" who respond--therefore it seems more democratic to me. Just like democracy, which is the worst system there is except for all of the others, this system is open to abuse. But IMO it's a fine first attempt.
Good Point.
things Brian talked about, like taking points away for downvoting someone. That forces you to "save" your negative votes for actual bad posts. I also like that you don't just get banned for losing points and that Brian is going to review the cases. Please people, don't vote against posts because of disagreement, however. Then there would be no point of having a board. Vote against something because it's a troll'ish or dick'ish response.
"Please people, don't vote against posts because of disagreement, however. Then there would be no point of having a board. Vote against something because it's a troll'ish or dick'ish response."
This is the key... if it happens the way you suggest, this will work very well.
Agreed. Some posts are stupid in terms of the point they're trying to make, but at least they're honestly trying to make a point. If they're used in the appropriate circumstances, the thumbs down will be a fantastic way to keep things under control.
Please people, don't vote against posts because of disagreement,...
co-sign.
The fact that you have to implore people not to vote something down because of simple disagreement speaks to the inherant flaws of the system. I am suprised that it is not more obvious to everyone...but I suppose that our dislike for trolls and idiots trumps good old fashioned ideals and principles dealing with fairness, openness and the "right" to face your accuser.
I disagree. With a new system, we need to know how it should be used. Explaining that isn't proving it's going to fail.
I don't think it's immediately obvious when you see a ranking system that minus votes should be used only for posts that shouldn't be there, particularly when plus votes are generally going to be for posts that you agree strongly with (maybe people will advocate giving high marks to posts you disagree with but are well-thought-out but I don't think it's fundamentally important that we do that).
Not saying it's going to succeed, just that failure isn't a foregone conclusion . . .
result of its installation, but once the dust settles it will work (with perhaps some tinkering).
And I think your observations regarding the WLA is right on. If there is so much animosity towards them, it will show when they counter other's posts. On the other hand, non-WLA support for them will show as well.
Then the idea is a good one. But seriously, this is the intranets, and this is as rabid a Michigan board as any. All forced irreverence,thesaurus ruffling, and claims to have graduated Michigan aside, this is a basic message board with the same basic rules, unwritten rules, heirarchies, castes, and all the rest that goes with message boards. It's all the same.
Will fans of other teams participate? Will they be voted out or off the island, or out of the WLA Treefort simply because they're Buckeyes and Sparties, and by nature UM fans don't like them and they don't like us and they love to give shit (especially in these hyper-sensitive, soul-searching times that are trying the UM soul)?
I like the point of Brian saying he will "review" certain cases--and this has GOT to cut down on the amount of screaming bitches who email him asking him to ban people.
All in all, I'm a fan of good ol' free speech. Let the community sort itself out. Let the individual posters and bloggers "man up"--HAHAHAHAHAH As it were--and use their available tools, like scroll keys and reply keys--and hell, funny picutres and videos are great ways to get back at a guy. You ban a guy--there goes an opinion and a source of unity--and you know what? There goes a little piece of the soul of a community because they believe in censorship and shutting voices down that they really, very simply, disagree with.
EDIT: I forgot to make a very important point: As is the case with Angry White Male, and their ability to kind of keep a stranglehold on the country for a few years, the most pissed off people are the ones most likely to vote. The casual writer/observer comes here for the entertainment, a few laughs, some recruiting news, etc. The avid guys, who maybe even feel like it's their duty to protect the world from the invasion of infidel people with common sense when it comes to Michigan football and its future under Rodriguez, OR who may feel they are the Five Kool Kids and wish to protect their Koolness, WILL be the ones most likely to vote. In other words, they care only because they're so pissed off and want to be the ones to set the tone for the board.
So the Really Cool Cats--guys like me who believe anybody ought to pretty much be allowed to post what they believe--are just gonna read something, and if we like it, we're all "Cool, man. Give me a martini and a Camel." And if we don't like it, we're all, "Cool, man. Give me a martini and a Camel, right after I call that guy an asshole." Usually, though, we'll see an avatar, and if it says anything like "BIGGEST SCHOOL X FAN EVER!" or "MOST NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS EVER" or "dex"--then we'll just scroll by and know there's no reason to read that guy's crap!
...this is as rabid a Michigan board
...forced irreverence,thesaurus ruffling, and claims to have graduated Michigan aside...
Will they be voted out of the WLA Treefort...
I like the point of Brian saying he will "review" certain cases--and this has GOT to cut down on the amount of screaming bitches who email him asking him to ban people.
As is the case with Angry White Male, and their ability to kind of keep a stranglehold on the country for a few years...
...the Five Kool Kids and wish to protect their Koolness, WILL be the ones most likely to vote.
I'm sorry, who is the angry white guy? And you are a victim? These tidbits are only from this one post above. You're the one that is coming across as the angry white guy.
I think you are the angry one and I'll issue you a challenge.
Say the word, and I will link this to Brian, and we will both have the "points" that each of us have issued to other people's posts, as of this post's time stamp. I'm sure that this would be no problem as all of this is automatically tracked.
How many (-) have you issued?
How many (+) have you issued to yourself?????
I have issued all of 3 (-) points up to this time-stamp.
Two to you [http://mgoblog.com/diaries/ot-wolverines-history-july-3rd-1863 thread that you polluted, and I don't mean your comment; and your clueless homophobia comment at http://mgoblog.com/content/verbal-vs-oral] and 1 mistakenly to another person when I didn't know what the button was for last night.
I have not issued any points to myself.
I've probably issued about 40 or so (+).
Again, all of this can easily be verified. Just say the word.
you're on a roll of negative points.
I'll post a lot more in blogs (but not just superfluous bullshit) just because I know the Kids at the WLA will vote me negative points--and I can set the record for negative points. It becomes a game.
I'm not even bothering to waste the effort needed to give you negative points. I have a feeling it's not just WLA people voting you down, but everyone else that's annoyed with your general schtick. I think you referenced a 'silent majority' or something in a previous post. Well, based on your score, I think the silent majority let everyone know how they feel about you.
freakin'blah
I could give 2 fucking shits about how many points I may or may not have, or anyone else's.
Waste of time.
The whole "you get points taken away from you if you vote thumbs down" thing is genius. I can't believe it was never thought of before on other boards.
For the same reason you can't give a buyer on eBay negative feedback anymore. It doesn't really make that much sense. Should anyone lose points for voting McFarlin down? I think maybe people are going a bit over the top in assigning negative points at the moment; some things are just meh, but not worthy of a -1. I'm pretty sure that will work itself out though. If the Spartan posters and 'Irish' are still positive, then this can't be that bad.
Know that we have this point thing people will trash every little thingyou say that is dumb, but in all i'm for it.