- Joined
- Oct 31, 2013
I have the power to delete ratings.
Have I told you what a great guy you are recently Compy ?
Post Ratings Discussion
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
Have I told you what a great guy you are recently Compy ?
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
We need more symbols. At least 50 more. How else am I going to convey my feelings in a series of pictures instead of words.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
Would it be good to have some kind of indication of how you rated a post (visible to you only)? Maybe just a subtle outline around the rating that you chose, or bold text. I tend to re-read posts a lot and sometimes I change my mind. I realize you can just undo the rating and check which one decrements, but that's kind of a pain and can be unreliable if the thread is active.
Edit: this is obsolete now that rating lists are public
Edit: this is obsolete now that rating lists are public
Last edited:
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
I think you guys just broke the ratings system somehow, I can't seem to find the autistic button at the bottom of posts anymore.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
People were complaining that you set up a script to mark literally every post autistic so you're banned from it. Soz.
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
People were wrong. I never did any such thing 
I was merely rating posts to the best of my ability.
I was merely rating posts to the best of my ability.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2013
Ratings we need:
Thumbs up
Thumbs down
Autistic (for shitposters and trollshielding)
Gonna be blunt here. The rest of them are really fucking moronic and look ugly as sin. It won't improve the quality of posts, it won't improve the quality of the community, it won't give significantly improved feedback, and it encourages the autistic circle jerk culture that's already been starting to pervade the forums.
Thumbs up
Thumbs down
Autistic (for shitposters and trollshielding)
Gonna be blunt here. The rest of them are really fucking moronic and look ugly as sin. It won't improve the quality of posts, it won't improve the quality of the community, it won't give significantly improved feedback, and it encourages the autistic circle jerk culture that's already been starting to pervade the forums.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
I looked at your history to get a good idea of what's contributing to this opinion.
1) You've used all of the buttons at least once, so I've a bit of trouble taking your suggestion seriously.
2) You've not been hit by any negative remarks except one two days ago, so it's not a rage post.
The buttons are almost completely invisible most of the time, unless you're on mobile. They are not visually disruptive and it's hard to take a complaint filed against FamFamFam icons as being gaudy seriously when they're used on basically every website in the universe, including a bunch of the fortune 500 companies. Even my company uses them for its website.
Going off on this, I tried to think of explanations as to why you might not like it for reasons outside of personal experience.
a) It's a reaction to change.
b) You think they're too jocular and you want to take posts more seriously.
c) You've witnessed an abuse of the system that warrants statements like "encourages autistic circle jerk culture".
Particularly interesting is that you've been using the buttons all throughout this thread on my posts and even disliked when I took action against against Dynastia for abusing the system. I can probably rule out "b" because of that; if you were interested in the integrity of the boards as a "serious" medium you would support weeding out misuse of systems.
You might also wonder why I chose to armchair psychologist your post instead of addressing it directly. That's because there's nothing to address. I have no angle to really respond to what you've said because you never elaborated on any part. How could they look better? Why do you think it won't be effective in discouraging shitposts? Why do you think people won't respond to their posts being marked as retarded? I have personally observed the contrary on all points. If you think it encourages circlejerk and also hutrs the community, you could provide an example. If an instance of that did instigate this pretty vitriolic response, surely you would cite it alongside the message, right?
So I'm left to assume it's just a reaction to change and you're being pessimistic.
My initial speculation on how certain, specific users might react to the knowledge that the community doesn't actually "like" what they have to say is coming along really nicely. The few instances of people who sit between the border of being widely accepted are taking notice to what's being thought about what they say. People aren't slowing down any in what they post, and in fact, posts have risen by like 20% in the last 2 days. Taking a cursory glance at the discussion board, I see no fucking a-log posts for the first goddamn time in months. I don't know if Katsu is deleting shit or people are restraining themselves, but I have no complaints right now. The wordy analytic people are posting as they always have and good posts are getting high ratings and spastic posts get low ratings.
I'm sorry. I really want to make everyone happy but from what I've seen there is absolutely no downside to what's been done. I think it's just a thing that people need to get used to.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2013
Alright. Time to respond point by point, I guess.
As much as I appreciate your attempt at analyzing me, it's based on incomplete information. You don't know me very well; you don't know my mental state, how I treat things I
"Lots of people use it" is not a proper rebuttal to my opinion that the buttons are intrusive and gaudy. This is known as the bandwagon fallacy.
The fact of the matter is that there's no real way to rebut my opinion because it's just, like... an opinion, man. My opinion alone doesn't mean shit, but if we really want to determine whether or not the buttons should be considered visually appealing, we'd need a forum vote.
That's a pretty long jump to take. You could always just ask me why I came to my conclusions, man.
The reason I think this will result in autistic circlejerking is because of the problems we've seen in threads recently and how this system could compound the problems. The latter half of the first Golden Knight thread and the end of the first SJW thread are perfect examples. As seen in the SJW thread, it ends up becoming a war of opinions rather than a rational discussion. As seen in the TGK1 thread's latter portion, we occasionally devolve into memespouting and a-logging. Like it or not, a good portion of our community takes part in trollshielding. While buttons like "a-log" and "autism" could possibly result in curbing this sort of shit, ten different ways to say "like" and ten more ways to say "dislike" throw fuel on the fire. In the SJW thread, for example, it has the potential to encourage people on both sides of the issues to radicalize their views as much as they can get away with in a war to get an ever-increasing number of likes and dislikes.
Dunno if that makes sense, I'm pretty tired. Haven't really gotten a lot of sleep in a few days.
The thing is that wasn't even my biggest point. I'll get to that in a bit.
See, that's where not knowing me kind of comes into play. I don't take this ratings system seriously (primarily because it comes off as a circle jerk.) I do like the idea of using the forums as a semi-serious medium, but I find this social network system of likes, dislikes, helpfuls, funnies, a-logs, autistic's, etc. really really hilariously awful and so i use it in a manner that's pretty flippant. It doesn't reflect my treatment of the forums as a whole. If you look at my posts I tend to try and spend my time analyzing and reflecting upon lolcow behavior.
I have to wonder how you would've had the potential to observe as much considering this system's been up for a day. That's bad science, mate. Really, neither of us can draw factual conclusions based on this forum quite yet, and we probably won't be able to make any definitive analysis for at least a month.
TL;DR incoming.
And here's where my biggest point comes in. I'm not asking you to make me happy. I'm not asking you to do everything I say. I'm giving feedback and sharing my opinion.
Really, responding to someone's opinion in a feedback thread with a lengthy psychoanalysis comes off as unprofessional and makes me sort of uncomfortable, especially considering how much you seem to assume you know about me when weighed against how off-base you are.
As much as I appreciate your attempt at analyzing me, it's based on incomplete information. You don't know me very well; you don't know my mental state, how I treat things I
This is false. Not to get autistic but I haven't used any of the following buttons:
- Press 2
- Informative
- Friendly
- Useful
- Off topic
"Lots of people use it" is not a proper rebuttal to my opinion that the buttons are intrusive and gaudy. This is known as the bandwagon fallacy.
The fact of the matter is that there's no real way to rebut my opinion because it's just, like... an opinion, man. My opinion alone doesn't mean shit, but if we really want to determine whether or not the buttons should be considered visually appealing, we'd need a forum vote.
That's a pretty long jump to take. You could always just ask me why I came to my conclusions, man.
The reason I think this will result in autistic circlejerking is because of the problems we've seen in threads recently and how this system could compound the problems. The latter half of the first Golden Knight thread and the end of the first SJW thread are perfect examples. As seen in the SJW thread, it ends up becoming a war of opinions rather than a rational discussion. As seen in the TGK1 thread's latter portion, we occasionally devolve into memespouting and a-logging. Like it or not, a good portion of our community takes part in trollshielding. While buttons like "a-log" and "autism" could possibly result in curbing this sort of shit, ten different ways to say "like" and ten more ways to say "dislike" throw fuel on the fire. In the SJW thread, for example, it has the potential to encourage people on both sides of the issues to radicalize their views as much as they can get away with in a war to get an ever-increasing number of likes and dislikes.
Dunno if that makes sense, I'm pretty tired. Haven't really gotten a lot of sleep in a few days.
The thing is that wasn't even my biggest point. I'll get to that in a bit.
See, that's where not knowing me kind of comes into play. I don't take this ratings system seriously (primarily because it comes off as a circle jerk.) I do like the idea of using the forums as a semi-serious medium, but I find this social network system of likes, dislikes, helpfuls, funnies, a-logs, autistic's, etc. really really hilariously awful and so i use it in a manner that's pretty flippant. It doesn't reflect my treatment of the forums as a whole. If you look at my posts I tend to try and spend my time analyzing and reflecting upon lolcow behavior.
I have to wonder how you would've had the potential to observe as much considering this system's been up for a day. That's bad science, mate. Really, neither of us can draw factual conclusions based on this forum quite yet, and we probably won't be able to make any definitive analysis for at least a month.
TL;DR incoming.
And here's where my biggest point comes in. I'm not asking you to make me happy. I'm not asking you to do everything I say. I'm giving feedback and sharing my opinion.
Really, responding to someone's opinion in a feedback thread with a lengthy psychoanalysis comes off as unprofessional and makes me sort of uncomfortable, especially considering how much you seem to assume you know about me when weighed against how off-base you are.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
So some quick things as a general response for anyone that cares, as the issue was sorted over chat.
"Bandwagon
You appealed to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation."
I said that you did something, I didn't say that everyone else was doing it. If I say "it's hard to take you seriously when you say you don't like Facebook because you use it" (logical), it's not the same as "Facebook is good because it's really popular" (fallacy).
You said I was creepy and making you uncomfortable because I took a few minutes to review how the system impacted you using your public profile. I saw that you used the buttons and that nobody was "bullying" you with the ratings. In response, you went line by line, questioned everything I said, and told me how you felt without showing me a reason for feeling that way. You took a defensive position, threw the book of fallacies at me inappropriately, called me unprofessional, and I still don't know what the original complaint was based on. Because of this, I don't have anything else I can say.
It seems like you just don't like it and that's how it is, and nothing I can say or show you will change your mind. When I addressed it in chat, you told me to just put your posts in spergatory and ended the conversation because you felt it was a personal attack.
Oh, and regarding the point that I can't possibly see any impact after a few days ("bad science"), I picked a few people I'd expect the system to impact and it has done so. I didn't speak absolutely and long-term, I just said (from what I had see) it was a very positive addition.
If there's anything else that needs to be said, it's probably best to just PM me, because I can't really see any follow ups to this being about the rating system.
"Bandwagon
You appealed to popularity or the fact that many people do something as an attempted form of validation."
I said that you did something, I didn't say that everyone else was doing it. If I say "it's hard to take you seriously when you say you don't like Facebook because you use it" (logical), it's not the same as "Facebook is good because it's really popular" (fallacy).
You said I was creepy and making you uncomfortable because I took a few minutes to review how the system impacted you using your public profile. I saw that you used the buttons and that nobody was "bullying" you with the ratings. In response, you went line by line, questioned everything I said, and told me how you felt without showing me a reason for feeling that way. You took a defensive position, threw the book of fallacies at me inappropriately, called me unprofessional, and I still don't know what the original complaint was based on. Because of this, I don't have anything else I can say.
It seems like you just don't like it and that's how it is, and nothing I can say or show you will change your mind. When I addressed it in chat, you told me to just put your posts in spergatory and ended the conversation because you felt it was a personal attack.
Oh, and regarding the point that I can't possibly see any impact after a few days ("bad science"), I picked a few people I'd expect the system to impact and it has done so. I didn't speak absolutely and long-term, I just said (from what I had see) it was a very positive addition.
If there's anything else that needs to be said, it's probably best to just PM me, because I can't really see any follow ups to this being about the rating system.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2013
I've been happily giving the new rating system a chance, but I'm not really seeing a point to the "friendly," "creative," and "optimistic" ratings. I think all three of those can be sufficiently covered by like/winner/etc. Just my two cents.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
I'm planning on merging those into the ones you've mentioned eventually. It's oddly satisfying when those ratings are applicable, though.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
My only suggestion would be to take away the anonymity of this. For example, it's helpful on the Chris discussion subforum, which has lots of speculation, if you see that a VIP has liked a post, you can take it more seriously as something that has some merit of actually having happened in Christory.
Also, anonymous ratings feels like chickenshit. Especially if you're labeling someone's post as dumb. The best way to prevent "abuse" of this system is to put sunshine on it.
Also, anonymous ratings feels like chickenshit. Especially if you're labeling someone's post as dumb. The best way to prevent "abuse" of this system is to put sunshine on it.
Crack
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2014
I seem unable to even "like" people's posts any more, is this because I haven't posted enough (with this post, 9 times)? If so, I think it's unfair because I had the right to rate other people's posts before. I barely have liked others' posts, but if people can go around labelling my posts autistic, I believe it's only fair I should be able to do likewise.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
Well! I hadn't been around the forums for a while and just saw the changes that were implemented to the like system. I've only fiddled around with it a but, but I gotta say I really like the new categories. It really makes me think of WHY I like a person's post. It's nice to be able to categorize "likes" in posts like this.
T
TL 611
Guest
kiwifarms.net
@Null is it possible to give VIPs a custom rating (that us peasants wouldn't have access to) like TRUE AND HONEST or something to reflect this?
The rating system isn't really anonymous. The OP can see who rated their posts dumb or whatever, its just the bottom bar doesn't name everyone who has rated. I imagine the bottom bar would be really ugly looking if it included the names of everyone who rated a post.
That is exactly why you don't have access to the rating system. It's not unfair, you're not an established user and therefore can't be trusted to not misuse the system and rage-rate. It's only 20 posts and 10 likes to unlock the ratings, it's not like the forum's asking you to do anything insane.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
That's how it was before, though. If there were a lot of people, clicking the rating would expand a window that showed all the names.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
Yes, but not now. I don't want to piss people off by introducing unique ratings for groups yet.
Last edited:
E
EI 873
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Is it possible to have icons of different sizes or something? I feel that something like a "verified information" banner should be a little more noticeable than the fairly subtle little icons, since that's pretty important (and not just a statement of opinion).
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
That's a good idea but it'd be hard to execute. Just making the icons smaller or larger wouldn't really do much. I'll think about it.