Post Ratings Discussion

[AP 297]

So an apparently extremely short-lived experiment with ratings "upended" the forum. Okay. You obviously can't be for real here, and if you are you're probably going to have your own thread in the lolcow forum soon enough, so see you then and have fun with whatever it is you're trying to do here.

Really you need to read the thread before you jump into it seeking halal. I was not the person who used the word "upend" originally. It was @Le Bateleur doing a sarcastic commentary.

https://kiwifarms.net/threads/post-ratings-discussion.4605/page-45#post-1051115

The ratings are not the cause of conformity. Pack mentality is and you and @yawning sneasel fell for my rendition of Nostalgia Jazz Admirer.

Please halal me, it will only prove my point further. This forum does not tolerate non-conformity

 

[Frank Rizzo]

Really you need to read the thread before you jump into it seeking halal. I was not the person who used the word "upend" originally. It was @Le Bateleur doing a sarcastic commentary.

https://kiwifarms.net/threads/post-ratings-discussion.4605/page-45#post-1051115

The ratings are not the cause of conformity. Pack mentality is and you and @yawning sneasel fell for my rendition of Nostalgia Jazz Admirer.

Please halal me, it will only prove my point further. This forum does not tolerate non-conformity

Are we *seriously* doing this right now? Over forum ratings that are meaningless?

 

[DNJACK]

Are we *seriously* doing this right now? Over forum ratings that are meaningless?

Why do you hate fun?

 

[Frank Rizzo]

Why do you hate fun?

It's a mediocre band with only a few decent hits.

 

[JU 199]

So much autism over something that doesn't matter.

 

[John Daker]

So much autism over something that doesn't matter.

Isn't that redundant?

 

[JU 199]

Isn't that redundant?

I felt like it needed to be said anyway.

 

[Rin]

While I think @SunLightStreak didn't make his point very clearly and got a bit more upset than was necessary, his core points are good. People here are afraid of going against the general opinion unless they're a licensed shitposter, because nobody likes to be rejected by the group. Admitting that you care what other people think of you just gets you mocked, however, so nobody's willing to confess to it. Also, I'd agree that negative ratings probably have a bigger impact on how people behave than positives. Given how easy it is to get positive ratings and how hard it is to get negatives, negative ratings are considered a lot more significant than positives. Negative ratings are basically a permanent reminder of your mistakes, and people don't like having to face the fact that they made mistakes (especially if, in their opinion, they were in the right). Taking away positive ratings might cut down on the amount of people attention whoring, however, which is a different, though somewhat connected, issue.

 

[AP 297]

How many threads can I recreate this experiment in?

Disagree with established consensus.
Seem to take bait.
Have baiter get drawn in more.
Get other "trolls" come in to throw bait.
Get more of them drawn in more.
Get swarmed proving conformity and group minded nature of forum.
Issue is plain to see. Yet everyone ignores it because they like being in a pack.

Repeat the cycle.

Dynastia does this quite often and so do others like LIC. Often we laugh at the people dumb enough to swarm. The people who have a license to disagree strongly enough and not get plastered with the Halal seal.

It is not ratings that create this group think. It is the desire for halal enforced and encouraged by ratings. Ratings on their own are meaningless. It is the halal desire and need for acceptance that does it.

When you came into this thread to "recreate cucky", you recreated the exact events of NJA instead. NJA got branded as the "enemy" and so everything they said was taken in its most negative form to enforce a narrative that confirmed the bias of the group. I derailed a thread because everyone wanted a new "cucky".

How willing are people going to disagree when if they take any firm position on any type of disagreement - they are labeled the next cucky, Lord RainbowDash, Asterisk, Kirby, or any of the countless halals we have had here. Ratings did not create this group think. The desire to cut and carve for acceptance did. It is so predictable and so easy to replicate.

 

[MrTroll]

While I think @SunLightStreak didn't make his point very clearly and got a bit more upset than was necessary, his core points are good. People here are afraid of going against the general opinion unless they're a licensed shitposter, because nobody likes to be rejected by the group. Admitting that you care what other people think of you just gets you mocked, however, so nobody's willing to confess to it. Also, I'd agree that negative ratings probably have a bigger impact on how people behave than positives. Given how easy it is to get positive ratings and how hard it is to get negatives, negative ratings are considered a lot more significant than positives. Negative ratings are basically a permanent reminder of your mistakes, and people don't like having to face the fact that they made mistakes (especially if, in their opinion, they were in the right). Taking away positive ratings might cut down on the amount of people attention whoring, however, which is a different, though somewhat connected, issue.

Anyone who seriously equates receiving a negative rating on a message board with making a "mistake" is spending way too much time on the internet and should go outside and get some fresh air. Nothing that happens here is consequential. People need to relax and just take shit in stride and give less of a fuck about what someone you'll never meet thinks about the quality of something you probably spent 35 seconds to write.

 

[DNJACK]

And somehow you put more effort into it than everyone else combined. You had us good.

 

[JU 199]

User who's named after *

Wait a minute, this isn't just a case of him 'disagreeing' with the consensus. That user by his own initiative has left a trail of autism around the farms. He doesn't just rail against consensus opinions, he argues an exceptional way that makes him look autistic and try-hard. Most importantly, he doesn't even notice. I set up the most obvious bait thread I could get away with and he still filled it with essays about circumcision.

@SunLightStreak What If it's the users fault? They came to place that examines people who are exceptional and then they act exceptional. It wasn't just one time, he's been doing this shit consistently for months. Are we supposed to ignore other farmers who act like that?

A user can get away with plenty of shit here. Nobody is gonna notice occasional neg rates on other users.

Rin mentioned something about removing/restricting the dumb rating, that would probably fix all of this. What can't understand is how this has become so existential. It's just ratings on a random website. It shouldn't be this big a deal, or part of a thesis on how KF users behave.

 

[Ruin]

Wait a minute, this isn't just a case of him 'disagreeing' with the consensus. That user by his own initiative has left a trail of autism around the farms. He doesn't just rail against consensus opinions, he argues an exceptional way that makes him look autistic and try-hard. Most importantly, he doesn't even notice. I set up the most obvious bait thread I could get away with and he still filled it with essays about circumcision.

@SunLightStreak What If it's the users fault? They came to place that examines people who are exceptional and then they act exceptional. It wasn't just one time, he's been doing this shit consistently for months. Are we supposed to ignore other farmers who act like that?

A user can get away with plenty of shit here. Nobody is gonna notice occasional neg rates on other users.

Rin mentioned something about removing/restricting the dumb rating, that would probably fix all of this. What can't understand is how this has become so existential. It's just ratings on a random website. It shouldn't be this big a deal, or part of a thesis on how KF users behave.

Wait which tard are we talking about? It's hard to keep em straight.

 

[JU 199]

Wait which tard are we talking about? It's hard to keep em straight.

Asterisk.

 

[Peace and Harmony]

I think we need a Mega Autistic rating for everyone in this thread.

 

[JU 199]

I think we need a Mega Autistic rating for everyone in this thread.

I did make this for holden once...

 

[Hai5]

why are you people fighting over a bunch of colored stickers lmfao

 

[AnOminous]

The risk was about being mocked openly, not about receiving neg rates. Rates are correlated to lolcow status.
Removing rates does nothing to address the key issue. We need to remove fun.

You're less likely to be mocked openly when there are neg rates because people will just rate a post dumb or autistic and then move on, instead of posting "You're dumb and/or autistic."

 

[MrTroll]

You're less likely to be mocked openly when there are neg rates because people will just rate a post dumb or autistic and then move on, instead of posting "You're dumb and/or autistic."

Which is the only thing that really bothers me about negative ratings. Just think of all the wonderfully petty drama and bickering we've missed out on because people chose to express their insignificant grievances towards other posters by passive-aggressively down-rating them instead of starting an internet food fight. It's a shame really.

 

[DNJACK]

I think Null trolled him right by banning him right when the autism is exploding.