It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ATS Points & Star System Overhaul

page: 1
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:09 AM
link   
While I generally applaud the way ATS is run by the owners and site moderators; I do have a sticking issue with the Star & Point system. I believe it's time for an overhaul.

Red Stars:
I would like to see the implementation of "Red Stars". This would allow people to express that they disagree with a view expressed by a member within a thread. It doesn’t even have to be expressed with a graphic. Perhaps just a variable number followed by "Disagree with this point of view"

E.g. (15) Members Disagree With This Point Of View.

One of the benefits I see in this strategy is that it may defuse some ugly situations by acting as a release valve. This could also save someone from making a mistake that deducts 500 points from their total, or even a ban situation. Currently we only see a number that represents the amount of members that agree with one side or another. The current Star system draws a metaphoric line in the sand which ultimately leads to adversarial behavior.

While debate is the intention of the forum, it may go some way in making things run in a more civilized fashion.

ATS Points:
Many times we see divisive (or troll threads) on the board that have the clear intention of marginalizing certain belief systems and creating yet more ugly situations. Often I've entered such a thread to give my point of view in the intention of trying to balance the argument.

Sometimes it’s not so easy to simply ignore them, let’s be honest. However I do not wish points to be rewarded to the Op's total as it's my belief that he/she does not deserve them in such a situation. And it's not always the case that they are banned or receive warnings from Moderators. It can lead one to believe that they are rewarded points for simply generating traffic no matter how dubious.

This often leads to a member who has received thousands of points with a less than honorable intention. This is clearly not fair when another honest contributor can toil away for months receiving just one point for every bit of quality input. Applause does not always come easily!

I believe this situation could be remedied with the addition of a simple checkbox below the message field that says "I do not wish to contribute points to this Author".

Though I am aware that it is not a simple task from a coding point of view to add these types of options to the website, I feel if we can implement Anonymous Users, we can surely implement a system that is more accurate and ultimately fairer/progressive.

I would like to hear other members points of view on these matters (and solutions) as well as opinions from the 3 Amigo's (if possible) and Moderators.

Kind Regards,

IRM


Please Flag The Thread If You Feel This Issue Is Important


[edit on 31/7/08 by InfaRedMan]




posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:13 AM
link   
No cause most of us people on here know who hate us and like us..

So its really no point..

No point in showing everyone else on the planet that same thing.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ThichHeaded
 


Stars are anonymous unless stated otherwise by the member giving them. It's a question of balance and agreeing or disagreeing with a point of view - not about liking or disliking another member.

Your kind of missing the point with that black & white perspective mate



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Ok say 9/11 forum ok..

I put up a post.. WTC was knocked down by space beams..

Now alot of people will disagree wit this post. reason cause I like starwars a tad to much..

So there would be nothing for a new person coming in say.. you..

You would see the red stars and be like wtf this sucks I am outta here.

See. I think the start system is good how it is.. you can tell if people dont agree just how they start something.

(oh sorry been up all might also 6 something am here.)



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:26 AM
link   


I believe this situation could be remedied with the addition of a simple checkbox below the message field that says "I do not wish to contribute points to this Author".


IRM



that sir, is a bloody brilliant idea.


So many obviously dodgy troll posts and hoaxes with the OP's ending up with 100s or even thousands of points and yes they do somethimes get missed by the mods. Sometimes i dont respond to threads simply because i dont wish to further someones points score when its obviously total BS, but that means i miss out on being able to make my point

Im with you IRM




posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
Ok say 9/11 forum ok..

I put up a post.. WTC was knocked down by space beams..
Now alot of people will disagree wit this post. reason cause I like starwars a tad to much..
So there would be nothing for a new person coming in say.. you..
You would see the red stars and be like wtf this sucks I am outta here.


Though I respect your point of view TH...

You've outlined the exact reasons why I feel a new system should be considered. A thousand people will come in and disagree with what is obviously a troll thread. However, the current points system will reward them with endless points for being so overtly silly and dare I say unrealistic and fantasy prone.

A swathe of red stars may inhibit that member from making such a mistake again, and lets face it, how many people are going to feel disenfranchised that majority of people don't believe the WTC was hit by laser beams?


Not too many I'd imagine!


It would only help in eventually clearing up the gigabytes of wasted space on the server and the precious time of members and moderators. It's a solution that I believe will work positively over the long term.

IRM



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:19 AM
link   
I think an opening post should not be able to receive stars or the thread receive flags until at least a second page is reached in the thread. I think three, four, posts into a thread is far too soon for any consensus as to its relevance or quality to be reached.

It's only my opinion, but I think a thread should have the opportunity to develop some "legs".



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:27 AM
link   
The idea of a negative rating system was discarded a while ago, for two reasons:

1. Danger of abuse by members and forum gangs
2. We want positive reinforcement

Greetings



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:28 AM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


Thanks for your valuable input MrPenny. I always look forward to your insightful posts. You have offered yet another viable/workable solution that I feel would take big steps in improving the current points situation.

Best,
IRM


PS: Your Avatar always makes me laff!



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
The idea of a negative rating system was discarded a while ago, for two reasons:

1. Danger of abuse by members and forum gangs
2. We want positive reinforcement

Greetings


To Address:

1. Danger of Abuse by members and forum gangs.

This already happens mate. We see it everyday from both sides. We all know who's who!

2. Positive Reinforcement

While positive reinforcement is good in some cases,

It's the trolls or delusionals that don't deserve it. It's like saying we positively reinforce your divisiveness or delusional state.

Remember, some people may not be of sound mind and to have that reinforced may just help that mental state progress into something worse. Any psychiatrist or psychologist will attest to that.

And for the trolls... Now they have a big, reinforcing pat on the back and the only message that sends is, come back and do it again! And as an added bonus your ATS points will grow!

It seems a majority are suffering for the benefit of the minority.

A blanket solution never fully works Skyfloating. It's far to simplistic and I personally believe ATS has the brains trust to find better solutions than are currently in practice.

IRM



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 07:45 AM
link   
I do not believe a process that measure negativity will be implemented.

If a poster decides whether or not to allow points, doesn't that change the measure from a comparison to all members to one of those members who agree with the material. That could create a situation where only certain topics are discussed because of the point situation. If a member uses points as a measure of another's activity then it could be misleading.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 07:45 AM
link   
I guess I could say there seems to be at least, from my perspective, the need for some other alternative to answering these OPs.

I would like to see some polls and surveys on certain popular topics rather so many lengthy threads that most likely say the same things over and over again or chat back and forth. (guilty)

I think many threads become derailed by chatter. I'm basically a poor reader and have poor memory of the OP. (guilty)

I'm not really so impressed with the rating system due to some overreaction to some topics getting flagged just for the subject matter rather than it's credibility and OP content.

I suppose many are flagged due to a comment rather than the OP? I don't see comments being flagged, but, just starred.

Maybe a: five point star system such as some other sites? This could be part of polls and surveys with the comment thread.

I think too many just post a negative comment rather than ignore the thread. So a topic and thread could be linked to a survey rather than becoming bogged down and too long.

I suppose some people such as the mods may even be able to filter answers that weren't starred? Many of my posts are ignored and it shows by others after me being starred for basically saying the same thing.

The star rating IS discriminatory that way and suggests (to me) gangs and cliques and obviously; ignored.

For all we know; we may be seeing our own posts when most others do not. I don't think it's too far fetched to believe a conspiracy within a conspiracy site using filters on low valued members. If I was a site owner; I would probably do the same thing.

I think surveys here would be better for some, such as myself, with poor memory and reading skills. If they do exist, they don't seem to be used here enough.

A post banned person could still do surveys and polls along with non members but still get points for doing polls and surveys.



[edit on 31-7-2008 by aleon1018]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Who cares how many points trolls get?



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Points gained through posting are slow and almost of no consequence, in the overall scheme of things. Points can be gained rather quickly by joining Twitter, doing a podcast, and contributing to TinWiki, so having angst over some person gaining a hundred points from a two page troll post is useless.

Stars, as they stand now, are much like a
at the start of the post. And I would have no real problem with some negative stars For Threads Only, perhaps a rating that would show only in the opening post area.

But were one to chose to rate the thread, there should be a cost. Just as you cannot star more than once under the current system, I feel it would only be fair that if you rated a thread, you couldn't post in it. And if you had already posted, then you couldn't rate it. This would allow negative feedback, without the need for negative comment, since you couldn't do both.

I also think that to rate a thread should require some minumum number of posts by the member, to avoid socks being used. A minumum high enough to discourage "drive by raters" and yet low enough to not be a problem for the casual ATSer.

Could such a system be abused. All systems can be abused. But doing so would be childish and time consuming. And it well might be a way to release tension without the need to make a negative post.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by enjoies05
 


Many do enjoies05. Your one line post is pretty much a troll in itself, given you add no further evidence and show a form of ignorance to the subject matter.

Throw away lines do nothing to advance this thread.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   
There is one excellent system in place, that is nearly impossible to abuse.

If you like a thread topic, reply and flag.

If you don't like a thread topic, don't reply and don't flag.

If you don't like a thread, but want to debunk the topic, reply with a well-composed rebuttal, and don't flag.

The system is designed in such a way that we hope our members adopt a degree of restraint so that truly terrible threads die a rapid death of inattentiveness.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 


Nice thoughts NGC!

I think it's healthy to debate this issue and raise valid ways of improving the ATS mechanism. Let's face it, nothing is perfect and can always be improved.

You have submitted many fantastic ideas here that should be seriously considered. I especially liked your idea of having to earn the right to rate and flag by accumulating a certain amount of points firstly. We already do that very thing with U2U's and Chat to stop abuse. It seems perfectly logical to implement the same criteria for the threads.

Thanks for throwing some great alternatives into the mix


IRM



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


That's all great in theory Bill but in practice it's not so easy as many of the contributions within threads will testify to. I do understand where your policy is coming from, i.e with the best possible intentions but to suggest that we already have a perfect system is not entirely correct.

Many fantastic contributers have to regularly take breaks from the site as the content starts to get them down, they loose faith and eventually fade away. This is something I know to be fact. We should have policies that are more proactive in keeping the valuable contributers that have helped build ATS into the success it is today as well as tougher countermeasures to remove the agenda driven trouble makers.

Finally I would like you to understand that this is not a whinge on my behalf. I enjoy ATS and only want good things in the future for it.

Thanks for adding your 2 cents worth mate


Edit For Typo

[edit on 31/7/08 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
I like the red stars idea.
Some posts just don´t warrant a written comment.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Psychopump
I like the red stars idea.
Some posts just don´t warrant a written comment.


I hear ya Psychopump. It's still nice to be able to have your say in a thread where you primarily disagree with it's premise, however words can sometimes take on a less than savory complexion. Though I do bypass most troll threads, sometimes it's not so easy.. hey I'm human!

So for those (admittedly like myself) sometimes, a red star would be a civilized method of disagreeing without getting caught up in a tirade of words and useless circular arguments. In essence it would be a pleasant way to say "I disagree", then happily move on to a decent, constructive thread.

IRM



new topics

top topics



 
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join



 
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread376969/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2017-47
68558
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:PE5TIEFANW6J2T7DW2U5AJEWWODJ2NMN
<urn:uuid:ce3c0c08-44e2-4cc2-a340-0f4a58cb598c>
2017-11-23T14:09:20Z
198.15.108.202
text/html
sha1:JVIINNJTNI4ZOP6YQH2VA2ZPTVRSOJPC
<urn:uuid:e05a4f09-1367-4e21-af25-7c85bc55efb7>
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread376969/pg1
length
response
<urn:uuid:5c565cc6-36ce-4241-a943-2f7a71122245>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-168-234-145.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-47
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2017
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf