Go back and read again. I said I dont use them unless i really feel they are earned because people get bitchy, not because I feel like being bitchy.
I didn't say I don't because of revenge Isaid others don't.
I will ignore the rest directed at me because it is based on a fallacy.
Fair enough. I was a bit unfair, I will admit it. I was really responding to your statement "If the risk is that great then perhaps this community is a poor fit."
Back to the topic ---
Again lets look at this logically.
-Pos ratings (Incentives/reward)
-Neg ratings (Disincentives/risk) or Banning
If you remove the latter from the equation then there is only a reward for conformity(acceptance) or good posting and no risk for non-conformity(rejection) or bad posting. People are motivated on a deeper level to avoid risk and to value reward. If people are seemingly too scared to disagree without being neg rated(rejected), then remove the disincentive entirely.
Remove rejection/risk/disincentive from the equation.
I think if we are going to upend this forum, lets at least have a clear methodology for it. Lets really place a value on what we are removing and adding. Just removing positive ratings and not really examining the source of the conformity is misguided. People naturally avoid risk.
If there is nothing but risk, but no real reward than the ratings are meaningless and only serve as a crude passive aggressive bludgeoning tool for those too cowardly to debate.
Also lets just be honest, about one other thing. Positive ratings save time and remove repetitive posts. Negative ratings do nothing to reduce the repetitive posts in a thread.
is banned.
