- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
It's just a number on your page. People take internet points way too seriously.
Post Ratings Discussion
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2014
I'm curious about to whom the first two achievement ratings were given.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
This. The ratings are just feelgood pills, whether one rating is worth one uptick or two doesn't make any difference, trying to "balance" them is a lost effort since none of them are worth more than communicating that someone thought your post was good.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2014
I've recieved multiple messages from people whose jimmies are rustled cuz I gave them a negative rating which is hilarious because folks like @ILoveMylarBalloons and @Connor have made negative ratings a badge of honor
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
Ya, it's retarded to cry about someone adding a red number to a bar.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2014
Don't think of negative ratings as negative, think of it as a convenient list of people who didn't get the joke.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
Everyone needs a good tard cry every once in a while though.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2014
tbh you could roll the negative ratings (at least dumb and A-log) into a generic 'shit' rating.
I don't think I've ever seen a post that I would rate A-log that I wouldn't also rate dumb. I also see a lot of posts that are bait or tryhard or whatever, and I feel like one generic rating could encompass all of these things.
Off topic and late are a little more specific, but I don't really think there's that much of a difference between an aggressively stupid post and a stupidly aggressive post.
Also, when I go back to the last page of my Ratings Given section, it says I haven't rated any posts yet. Think that might be a bug.
I don't think I've ever seen a post that I would rate A-log that I wouldn't also rate dumb. I also see a lot of posts that are bait or tryhard or whatever, and I feel like one generic rating could encompass all of these things.
Off topic and late are a little more specific, but I don't really think there's that much of a difference between an aggressively stupid post and a stupidly aggressive post.
Also, when I go back to the last page of my Ratings Given section, it says I haven't rated any posts yet. Think that might be a bug.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
I'd like if A-Log one was retained, you could the same way make the case for a lot of the specific ratings but A-log is part of our forum culture and history. (consider we also have the "Deviant" that's pretty much never used and semper fidelis that's there just for variety). The variety in the ratings may not be always useful, but it's still nice to have for fun. Trollshielding or needlessly comparing one's self to a lolcow(which falls under A-logging) does come up even if the body of the post itself isn't horrendously stupid or malicious, so there is in my personal opinion use for a separate a-log rating.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2014
I get what you're saying, but I feel like it's better to design the ratings around the way they're used in application than theory. Most people who compare themselves to a lolcow get feels or even winner ratings (look at all of this bullshit about people's abusive mothers in a thread about permavirgins). The only time I see A-log used (and I admit, the only time I've used it) is when a user is being unnecessarily hostile, whether that's troll shielding or not.
There's definitely a case to be made for keeping it active on the Chris forums, but I think there's a lot of overlap in application between it and the Dumb rating, whatever they were originally meant to connote.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
I'd put that largely down to individual forum culture. In the Chris forum comparing yourself to Chris will most likely get you a-logs, unless it's clearly like a meant-to-be-a-joke.
Yeah, the Loveshy threads are pretty rampant with the poster-lolcow comparisons. I guess I can't really too too harsh on the people who do that if they're new to the board since it's been highly rampant in the Chris boards since the beginning(ergo, the reason the concept of "A-Logging exists on the board in the first place), but it's rather indicative of user error (see how the Mr.Enter board seems to reward really terrible posting that wouldn't fly anywhere else) rather than the ratings system being flawed. I'd agree with Ramm's assessment that the Kiwi has a lot of Loveshy-y people that somehow have managed to not be bitter unlike the Sluthate / Loveshy people and when cows hit too close to home for them, they'll use their personal experiences as arguments. It's understandable, and to an extent if you're trying to directly reason with a lolcow that's kind of like you except shittier that you'd try to get to them by sharing your shared experiences and it's arguably better than "Chris gives the rest of us pants-shitting autists with Sonic OCs a bad name!" but as far as the site goes, yeah, that's not entirely desireable.
Overlap yeah, but I think what's kind of worse is that the site develops even more of a "you can't a-log [X] Lolcow because they're just that bad!"-attitude. I'm confident that the Loveshy sub will, in time generate a better culture when the discussions aren't 700+ page clusterfucks and people can talk about their own experiences in the Loveshy-realm without having to bring it to the discussions that are strictly about lolcows. I'd like to say that you brought up plenty of good points but I'd still say that the A-Log rating even outside of Chris boards is useful, for people that want to make the distinction between "your post is shit and garbage" and "hey, would it be possible to toot your own horn less in a discussion about a lolcow".
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2013
There should be a "cool guy" rating and i should be able to give it to myself
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2014
I agree with this because alot of the new people (cough tumblrinas cough) have no idea what A-logging is. They seem to think being a dick is a-logging no matter what, and most of the time it's over something retarded that isn't even a-logging like "offensive" jokes. For example, look at all the A-log ratings Catparty got for making a fat joke in the fathate thread earlier this morning. I wouldn't mind if the a-log rating was only on Chris threads or something.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
The definition of "a-logging has a sliding scale" and the most official definition of what A-logging is, is "To punch down in a way that is shameful to yourself", which is the definition the website owner made as a banner over the boards a while back(it's since been removed) so it's more like a call it when I see it-basis.
I get your point, but using a dedicated baitposter who was literally fishing for those ratings is a bad thing to generalize actual discussion on.
Saying "bronies should be put into Auschwitz"(an actual post) would fall into the same category and it's still a-logging even if bronies are not-really-welcome people on this site and it's definitely not too offensive for our standards; it's still a groan-worthy non-contribution and "punching down in a manner that is shameful to yourself).
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
But Catparty only said it to piss of retards who use Tumblr.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2014
Okay, that was a bad example, I just didn't want to use myself so people wouldn't think I was bitching about getting negative ratings. It happened to me here and it happened to @vitriol in the "Kent:Elliot Rodger the Second" thread but it looks like he deleted his post it got so bad. I don't care about getting negative ratings, the joke I made was definitely dumb, I'm just saying at least use the correct negative rating.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2014
tbh that's the sort of low-effort shitpost I'd like to see this hypothetical rating applied to.
You're talking about the cotton picking joke, right? Yeah, that's not A-logging by any reasonable definition of the word, but, again, the sort of post that could easily get covered by a rating that just says 'I think this post is garbage' without needing to get more specific. I just rated it late because cotton picking jokes seem a little stale in 2015.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2014
I didn't delete it but somebody has. My only complaint would be that one of my highest rated comments was a holocaust joke made when people thought eli was jewish and the one with 25+ negative ratings was a black joke. I'm probably just misreading the forum but that seems inconsistent. As others have said though its only numbers on a profile and I don't think its a huge deal.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2014
I feel like that also has to do with the different communities that are developing around the sub-boards. People tune into Deagle Nation because they want all the latest Race War updates, while the general Lolcow board probably has more people from Tumblr and stuff.
It would be interesting to see if there was any way to track ratings given by sub-board, though.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2014
I'm not sure being able to see the ratings given, without knowing why they were given, would be all that useful. I think the rest of your post is bang on though it varies even within the lolcow board- I would likely have gotten away with more on the ADF thread than some others. On certain topics one can almost predict the users who will be giving out negative ratings.