META: Bring Back Actual Voting

Submitted by Darker Blue on October 9th, 2012 at 10:26 AM

I addressed this in Thorin's YouTube thread. 

 

 

I absolutely hate this system of voting on posts in a thread. Half the fun of MGoBoard used to be, finding a post in a thread that was +42 or -29 ( the negative posts were always more fun IMHE). 

 

Lets bring this back, there has to be a way to get it done. I'd be willing to chip in some cash if its a matter of monies. WE CAN DO IT> 

 

 

UPDATE: I emailed Mr. Cook with a link to this thread. I don't know how often he checks the board but we'll see if this can get done. 

Comments

a2_electricboogaloo

October 9th, 2012 at 10:36 AM ^

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.

French West Indian

October 9th, 2012 at 10:39 AM ^

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.

JHendo

October 9th, 2012 at 10:49 AM ^

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. 

 

WolvinLA2

October 9th, 2012 at 11:34 AM ^

I agree on the threshold bit, but the ability to neg someone will help take care of that problem too.  

With negs that actually bring down your point total, it will take longer for people to get to 100 points because they will with a doubt say some stupid things in their first hundred points, meaning they'd really be at 150 or so of today's points before they were able to post.  

Also - if people know that if they make a dumb post they'll get lots and lots of negative points, they'll think twice once they hit that 100 number, knowing a bad post might bring them back to 50 in a hurry.

The big problem now is that if you make a bad post or start a bad thread, there will be no ramification outside of getting ribbed, unless it's terribly offensive.  Having a point threshold plus consequencs might be enough.

michgoblue

October 9th, 2012 at 10:50 AM ^

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.

 

profitgoblue

October 9th, 2012 at 11:44 AM ^

Its the gift that keeps on giving all year-round.  I still have people that neg me on sight for my "performance" during that time.  My (and I think jHackney's) position was that the vitriol was ridiculous, regardless of opinions.  We blew up every argument about it, regardless of the position.  And I think we learned that even trying to do that was bad.  I think everyone learned a lot from that era - not just as fans but as participants on this blog.  I know I did.  And my one take from it as a moderator now is to make sure that everyone respects each other. 

So, from my standpoint, the accumulating point system helps weed out an punish the trolls.  And the moderators can simply provide back-up in the event they don't get the message rather than how it works now.

lbpeley

October 9th, 2012 at 11:17 AM ^

but I'm pretty sure Brian stated it was lost in the hack bombing of a few years ago. Had to go with different "thingies" (the extent of my website knowledge) in the rebuild and that awesome points system was not a possibility at that time.

ken725

October 9th, 2012 at 1:08 PM ^

You are correct.  Brian had to change it after the site got attacked.  I think all or some of the codes were turned malicious, but I'm sure someone with actual programming knowledge can be more specific.

coldnjl

October 9th, 2012 at 10:51 AM ^

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. 

profitgoblue

October 9th, 2012 at 10:55 AM ^

We can regulate that kind of stuff.  I won't lie - having a true, accumulating voting system was tremendous - both entertaining and less pressure on moderators to regulate rogue users - but I will be the first to admit that I have no idea what goes into programming (cost, time, labor, etc.).  No idea.

Njia

October 9th, 2012 at 2:36 PM ^

I actually read the beginning of Brian's "That 70s Game" entry to my wife yesterday with the commentary that it was a perfect example of why I love this site. The writing (not just Brian's, but also many MGoContributors) is some of the best on the internet. That this site just happens to be about Michigan athletics is a worthy bonus, but it would be exceptional without it, too.

MGlobules

October 9th, 2012 at 10:51 AM ^

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.

jmblue

October 9th, 2012 at 10:55 AM ^

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.