Suggestion: Compiling Information Using the Ratings System

[Philosophy Zombie]

snip

Not bad except that in many threads posts get ratings based more on order than content. Like a shitpost in disco on the first page will always get a lot more ratings than posts on the later pages.

Edit sorry for random hotlink I'm awful at mobile

 

[Stratomsk]

I can now see potential problems with being able to organize the order of a thread by the ratings. This would put emphasis on the shitposts to rise to the top and hide the posts are aren't rated as highly. If the post are always shown in order as they were posted this wouldn't be an issue. Just to point this out, only in very rare circumstances do I ever see shitposts rated "Informative". Due to the fact that they tend to be rated "Winner" and "Agree" I don't believe the system should be totally dismissed when it helps fulfill a very useful purpose when it comes to informing casual users.

Now, what would be in your opinion the implications of this system if you are allowed to filter out posts by any ratings and number of them?

 

[CatParty]

I can now see potential problems with being able to organize the order of a thread by the ratings. This would put emphasis on the shitposts to rise to the top and hide the posts are aren't rated as highly. If the post are always shown in order as they were posted this wouldn't be an issue. Just to point this out, only in very rare circumstances do I ever see shitposts rated "Informative". Due to the fact that they tend to be rated "Winner" and "Agree" I don't believe the system should be totally dismissed when it helps fulfill a very useful purpose when it comes to informing casual users.

Now, what would be in your opinion the implications of this system if you are allowed to filter out posts by any ratings and number of them?

users with the most positive ratings overall should be the first posts in the thread

 

[OBAMATRON]

The effort to code this probably isn't worth the reward.

 

[AP 297]

Actually, I am thinking of something quite a bit different. A Lolcow thread branching system.

It seems in Lolcow threads, there are a couple of ways of dividing these threads that could be very helpful. I myself am not a fan of the Reddit system. It removes discussion that is unique or new in favor of conformity or cliche edginess at times.

Some Lolcow threads that are longer could benefit from a branch system that divides thread content in to 3 distinct formats.

1. Updates and raw information(this could be as @Hellblazer suggested highlighted by staff) - It only contains updates and info with very little commentary.
2. Interactions with the persons of interest themselves. - This is where the POI can make their case when they seem to come about why they do not deserve their thread and what not.
3. Discussion and commentary. - Where members can talk about the info and interact to build a more interesting exchange if ideas and thoughts without having the discussion derailed by the lolcow under some circumstances.

This method of branch division would allow some threads to stay smaller and informative even while an lolcow is present. Allowing the Lolcow to determine the form and substance of their own conversation seems to enable them more than those who might want to enjoy the content or learn something about them.

While not as active at the moment, the Mocking Marjan group allowed some of this to transpire. We got to learn a few things and had some fun at Marjan's expense as he wondered what we were saying about him. That is just my suggestion. I have wanted to float this idea for some time.

 

[Stratomsk]

Actually, I am thinking of something quite a bit different. A Lolcow thread branching system.

It seems in Lolcow threads, there are a couple of ways of dividing these threads that could be very helpful. I myself am not a fan of the Reddit system. It removes discussion that is unique or new in favor of conformity or cliche edginess at times.

Some Lolcow threads that are longer could benefit from a branch system that divides thread content in to 3 distinct formats.

1. Updates and raw information(this could be as @Hellblazer suggested highlighted by staff) - It only contains updates and info with very little commentary.
2. Interactions with the persons of interest themselves. - This is where the POI can make their case when they seem to come about why they do not deserve their thread and what not.
3. Discussion and commentary. - Where members can talk about the info and interact to build a more interesting exchange if ideas and thoughts without having the discussion derailed by the lolcow under some circumstances.

This method of branch division would allow some threads to stay smaller and informative even while an lolcow is present. Allowing the Lolcow to determine the form and substance of their own conversation seems to enable them more than those who might want to enjoy the content or learn something about them.

While not as active at the moment, the Mocking Marjan group allowed some of this to transpire. We got to learn a few things and had some fun at Marjan's expense as he wondered what we were saying about him. That is just my suggestion. I have wanted to float this idea for some time.

I really like the general idea here but the issue comes into focus when you look at how precisely these posts should be highlighted. Perhaps staff and supervisors such as @Hellblazer are exclusively given the tools to organize a thread by its ratings and that will make it far easier for them to hand-pick the best ones.

A thread that has gotten too long (300 pages or more seems fair) would be designated a 'long thread'. After the fact they would give the thread the proper indexes/categories you mentioned to keep a record of information, discussion and banter, as well as discussion with lolcows themselves to separate tabs.

 

[AP 297]

I really like the general idea here but the issue comes into focus when you look at how precisely these posts should be highlighted. Perhaps staff and supervisors such as @Hellblazer are exclusively given the tools to organize a thread by its ratings and that will make it far easier for them to hand-pick the best ones.

A thread that has gotten too long (300 pages or more seems fair) would be designated a 'long thread'. After the fact they would give the thread the proper indexes/categories you mentioned to keep a record of information, discussion and banter, as well as discussion with lolcows themselves to separate tabs.

We have a featured thread system already in place. Perhaps some of the people given the ability feature threads can highlight the areas that are informative and separate them. Allowing the cow their own play pen to frollic will make a lot of the discussion easier to filter and allow people to be better informed when they come into the discussion.

People will always shitpost and some shitposting is even useful at times, because it can provoke reactions and responses. A branching system allows everyones natural abilities to shine. Some people are good at gathering info. Some are trolls and are great at angering a cow to produce funny content, and others are great at debate and having a fun and interesting conversation. A branching system allows everyone to use their gifts and provide more robust content.

That is my thought. I want to hear staff's too. I think we have a number of cows whose threads have grown a bit too large to examine at times and a branch filter system in my view is an effective way to breathe new life into those subjects/people. I worry it may be too much code myself though. I do not know Xenforo systems that well.

I have been wanting to make this suggestion for a while.

 

[Stratomsk]

We have a featured thread system already in place. Perhaps some of the people given the ability feature threads can highlight the areas that are informative and separate them. Allowing the cow their own play pen to frollic will make a lot of the discussion easier to filter and allow people to be better informed when they come into the discussion.

People will always shitpost and some shitposting is even useful at times, because it can provoke reactions and responses. A branching system allows everyones natural abilities to shine. Some people are good at gathering info. Some are trolls and are great at angering a cow to produce funny content, and others are great at debate and having a fun and interesting conversation. A branching system allows everyone to use their gifts and provide more robust content.

That is my thought. I want to hear staff's too. I think we have a number of cows whose threads have grown a bit too large to examine at times and a branch filter system in my view is an effective way to breathe new life into those subjects/people. I worry it may be too much code myself though. I do not know Xenforo systems that well.

I have been wanting to make this suggestion for a while.

Its perfect.

People don't have to worry about their posts being obscured by filtering and important information can still rise to the top by way off staff and supervisors that will assume this system whenever a thread gets too large for its own good. Implementing a way for staff and supervisors to organize posts by rating will make it far easier for them to do that than the alternative of taking a really long time that would be normally required to peruse a thread.

 

[Philosophy Zombie]

I forgot to answer the first part of the post I quoted, @Stratomsk. I still think organizing by achievement rating is a good idea. All admins have access to it, and honestly that's enough because exceptionally good contributions are pretty sparse as it is. It seems to me like that's practically what the rating was meant for.

The branching system also sounds effective. Maybe in the advanced search section there could be an option to search by rating and number of ratings (ex. Informative, 10).

 

[Holdek]

It's a good idea IMO, but like a lot of ideas proposed it might be good to ask staff if it's even technically feasible before discussing if we should do it or not.

 

[Stratomsk]

Maybe in the advanced search section there could be an option to search by rating and number of ratings (ex. Informative, 10).

The issue I've noticed since I started this thread is that there is a fear this would be like Reddit's system where the greatest liked posts (usually reaction images or shitposts) get pushed to the top which would obscure everything else. People don't want the implication of their posts being possibly hidden due to it not having enough of a certain rating even if the feature is optional. Leaving this up to staff and supervisors to handle these really long threads would be the best way to qualm this fear and would help document important information, keeping all sides satisfied.

It's a good idea IMO, but like a lot of ideas proposed it might be good to ask staff if it's even technically feasible before discussing if we should do it or not.

I'll see if its possible or not.

 

[Philosophy Zombie]

I meant it would use the search format. That meant there would be a list of abbreviated posts. You would have to click on them to go to the page the post is on to rate it, where the other posts would still be visible.

 

[Stratomsk]

I meant it would use the search format. That meant there would be a list of abbreviated posts. You would have to click on them to go to the page the post is on to rate it, where the other posts would still be visible.

This seems like a far better option because it would not hide any posts but instead highlight the best ones at a users preference. What are your thoughts on this @AWB-81?

 

[AP 297]

This seems like a far better option because it would not hide any posts but instead highlight the best ones at a users preference. What are your thoughts on this @AWB-81?

I have no idea what kind of coding that any of this would require. So I am not the one to answer that.

I was hoping for a chime in like before from @Glaive on the ideas. To be quite honest - unless it is feasible, we are really just dangling in the wind.

 

[Stratomsk]

I have no idea what kind of coding that any of this would require. So I am not the one to answer that.

I was hoping for a chime in like before from @Glaive on the ideas. To be quite honest - unless it is feasible, we are really just dangling in the wind.

For one thing, its clear @Glaive doesn't even believe that the effort to code this is worth the reward. I strongly disagree with that sentiment. The current procedures for handling a long thread is this:

1)Lock thread if it gets to be extremely long. Holden's original thread reaching 1000 pages before getting promptly locked is a good example.
2)Make a new thread.
3)Repeat for any other similar case.

I shouldn't need to say how inefficient this practice becomes. There is value in providing a system that makes it easier to archive the information in a long thread with hundreds of pages or more. At that point you are basically hoping that somebody did the work themselves. Why would you take the plunge into reading such a large thread? Short answer is that you simply wouldn't and would skip most of the pages to the end. The time required would simply be too much for most users to read everything, which as a direct result leads to a larger gap in knowledge between those new to a older thread and those who had been following it since its beginning. As time goes on there will be more and more of these threads that are hundreds of pages long which will extrapolate on these problems, making them far more pervasive.

Hoping that somebody did the work to archive all the information in a thread themselves is wishful thinking and doesn't help us in the slightest. That is precisely why we should nip this problem in the bud by giving users the tools that make it possible to skim longer threads without obscuring posts.

 

[DuskEngine]

Yeah. It would be a toggled option and wouldn't censor posts.

It wouldn't need to. Anyone who turns on the auto-hide feature is basically seeing a truncated version of the forums, and that means that they're going to be cut off from parts of the forums, which encourages people to withdraw into their own little boxes.

Posts by cows themselves often get >30 dumb ratings. If they're aut0-hidden, then this feature defeats itself as a way to skim threads.

That could be easily fixed by giving all staff and supervisors the ability to highlight posts.

This actually seems like a really good idea. As well as informative posts being auto-bolded.

 

[Stratomsk]

It wouldn't need to. Anyone who turns on the auto-hide feature is basically seeing a truncated version of the forums, and that means that they're going to be cut off from parts of the forums, which encourages people to withdraw into their own little boxes.

Posts by cows themselves often get >30 dumb ratings. If they're aut0-hidden, then this feature defeats itself as a way to skim threads.

I agree. My initial thoughts on this were off the mark and don't really work in the grand scheme of things.

While I think @AWB-81 's idea is ultimately the best, its also a system that would be very difficult to code. @Philosophy Zombie 's idea of having a search format that means there would be a list of abbreviated ratings. You would have to click on them to go to the page the post is on to rate it and the other posts would still be visible. His idea would be far easier to code comparatively and I don't see any repercussions with it as well.