posted by camo on Wed 6th Feb 2008 04:39
Conversations Sick of comments getting voted down for no good reason. How about enforcing a comment with every down vote?
Previous ConversationNext Conversation
Comments:
And?
by Almafeta on Wed 6th Feb 2008 06:02 UTC
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

All user-operated moderation systems inevitably boil down to popularity contests. No reason to worry to any degree.

Reply Score: 2

RE: And?
by sbergman27 on Thu 7th Feb 2008 01:40 in reply to "And?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

All user-operated moderation systems inevitably boil down to popularity contests.


User-based moderation is a voting system. I've never understood why some sites try to treat it as something that it is not.

You should only vote something down when the arbitrary rules listed (link:here) have been violated, but you can vote up anything you want. Yeah, right. Positive moderations are of one unit, and negative ones another. But lets just add them together and present the result as a unitless number.

Why don't we just call a spade a spade and mod each other the way that we feel that we should, and be done with it, rather than continuing the charade of pretending that if you make a point with which we strongly disagree, we won't mod you down unless you actually call someone a "f--kwad" and make unsubstantiated assertions regarding the moral character of their mother? (But we'll mod you up if we happen to like Suñdáhs Udójdh Linux, or Vista, or MacOS XI.)

"Popularity contest" is a loaded phrase. Call it a *voting system*, and treat it like a *voting system* and I think we would all be happier.

Yeah, I know we're supposed to discuss the mod system only in private with the site admins, but that's pretty silly, too, if you ask me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: And?
by RandomGuy on Thu 7th Feb 2008 15:28 in reply to "RE: And?"
RandomGuy Member since:
2006-07-30

Yeah, the asymmetry of the voting system bugs me too.
To be perfectly honest, most of the time I use it as a tool to prevent trolls from derailing otherwise interesting threads.
And sometimes I vote a comment up to say "Thanks!" if somebody answered one of my questions and I'm too lazy to write a reply.
Or if somebody asked an interesting question.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: And?
by elsewhere on Mon 11th Feb 2008 18:11 in reply to "RE[2]: And?"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

Yeah, the asymmetry of the voting system bugs me too.
To be perfectly honest, most of the time I use it as a tool to prevent trolls from derailing otherwise interesting threads.
And sometimes I vote a comment up to say "Thanks!" if somebody answered one of my questions and I'm too lazy to write a reply.
Or if somebody asked an interesting question.


So to a certain extent the system works.

The way I see it, either the community self-moderates, or we run to the admins to do it. I'd prefer the former, because the admins are people like the rest of us and will invariably make decisions that will be scorned by a segment of users, anyways.

So like you're doing, if you think the trolls are unfairly derailing a thread, use your points to swing it the other way. And if you see a post that is rational, well-articulated and on-topic, then mod it up and help prevent the trolls from bringing down an unpopular opinion for the sake of it.

Almost everyone has mod points, but I suspect it's only a small segment that actually uses them. In fact, I don't use mine nearly as much as I should so I'm going to try and change that.

It's a meritocracy but one where everybody votes. If you don't use your vote, you can't complain about the outcome.

And if you do vote but the community swings the other way anyways, then that's a reflection on the community, not the board or individual posters.

Maybe for purposes of clarification, it could be changed to agree/disagree, since that seems to be how it's being used. But I'm not sure I agree with that, since I don't mind modding up a well argued comment even if I utterly disagree with it.

Just my 2c...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: And?
by Adam S on Fri 8th Feb 2008 14:31 in reply to "RE: And?"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Yeah, I know we're supposed to discuss the mod system only in private with the site admins, but that's pretty silly, too, if you ask me.


Welcome to "conversations," where you can discuss anything you want, even moderation. So this claim is not really true.

User-based moderation is a voting system. I've never understood why some sites try to treat it as something that it is not.


We've always called it "voting."

Reply Score: 1

Simple method to parse ratings
by fretinator on Wed 6th Feb 2008 18:02 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

If my comment gets rated very well, then it is because of how intelligent, witty, and generally insightful I am.

If my comment is rated poorly, it is probably because of trolls - or perhaps it was so deep that most of the unenlightened ones just didn't get.

Works for me!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Simple method to parse ratings
by camo on Thu 7th Feb 2008 05:01 in reply to "Simple method to parse ratings"
camo Member since:
2007-10-08

If my comment gets rated very well, then it is because of how intelligent, witty, and generally insightful I am.


LOL. That right, you deserve it.

Reply Score: 1

Hmm
by aitvo on Wed 6th Feb 2008 21:34 UTC
aitvo
Member since:
2006-09-03

Maybe it's not the trolls that are doing the rating. Perhaps the trolls are the ones being rated.

Something to think about.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by anomie
by anomie on Thu 7th Feb 2008 18:58 UTC
anomie
Member since:
2007-02-26

Sick of comments getting voted down for no good reason. How about enforcing a comment with every down vote?


I'm with you 100%. I wrote the forum mods/admins and requested that down-mods automatically associate the user name who voted it down.

At very least, it would be nice if posts couldn't be modded down (only up). I have seen too many conversations where someone has a legitimate point (and breaks no forum rules) but is voted into oblivion.

Do people want honest, intellectual discussion, or do people want to have a hollering contest?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by anomie
by camo on Fri 8th Feb 2008 03:17 in reply to "Comment by anomie"
camo Member since:
2007-10-08

down-mods automatically associate the user name who voted it down.


Nice idea that.


At very least, it would be nice if posts couldn't be modded down (only up)


I think this the best solution. That way, if the community doesn't like your comments, the score never gets higher. The trolls have their power taken away. Either they don't vote or they have to comment, be identified and challenged if they get out of line.

Brilliant idea anomie.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by anomie
by Adam S on Fri 8th Feb 2008 14:28 in reply to "Comment by anomie"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

At very least, it would be nice if posts couldn't be modded down (only up)


Ha! That defeats the entire point of the mod system. The idea is to remove trolls - personal attacks, spam, etc. If anything, then, the UP votes should be removed.

Bitching about the mod system is so tired. Eventually, we'll replace it with a new mod system, but for now, it is what it is.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by anomie
by anomie on Fri 8th Feb 2008 16:53 in reply to "RE: Comment by anomie"
anomie Member since:
2007-02-26

Ha! That defeats the entire point of the mod system. The idea is to remove trolls - personal attacks, spam, etc.


Trolls/spam can be flagged as abuse. That would also remove them. Lots of forums do this successfully.

As it is now, there are incentives to shout (mod) down opposing viewpoints, which makes any serious discussion almost impossible.

Bitching about the mod system is so tired. Eventually, we'll replace it with a new mod system, but for now, it is what it is.


This is a discussion like any other, not "bitching". We're exchanging ideas and hoping for a better long term solution. That is all.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by anomie
by aitvo on Sat 9th Feb 2008 04:48 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by anomie"
aitvo Member since:
2006-09-03

I mod down stupid, silly, inaccurate viewpoints all the time when they aren't backed by facts. Especially when they become hostile over their inaccurate opinions. No, religion doesn't apply, I mod Linux, Windows, Mac, *OS lovers and haters equally.

If you "think" or "feel" it's right, but you can't or won't prove it with science, it's yet another troll (YAT) that I'm going to mod down. ESPECIALLY if the name calling starts (IE: use linsux or Microsoft and that's an instant -1. Don't like it, too bad.)

Sorry.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by anomie
by aitvo on Sat 9th Feb 2008 05:22 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by anomie"
aitvo Member since:
2006-09-03

osnews changed mdollar to microsoft, nice! I meant Linsux or M $.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by anomie
by kaiwai on Fri 8th Feb 2008 22:04 in reply to "Comment by anomie"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

"Sick of comments getting voted down for no good reason. How about enforcing a comment with every down vote?


I'm with you 100%. I wrote the forum mods/admins and requested that down-mods automatically associate the user name who voted it down.

At very least, it would be nice if posts couldn't be modded down (only up). I have seen too many conversations where someone has a legitimate point (and breaks no forum rules) but is voted into oblivion.

Do people want honest, intellectual discussion, or do people want to have a hollering contest?
"

I second that - maybe we'll find out who is actually randomly going through the forum moderating things down; maybe if the problem becomes too bad a good old 'ganging up' of disgruntled posters will make these people change their tune.

For me, I never moderate down. If it's not a good post, I ignore them. If I think it does contribute to the discussion, I'll moderate up.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Coxy
by Coxy on Fri 8th Feb 2008 11:18 UTC
Coxy
Member since:
2006-07-01

I have my settings set to -5 so that I can see anything, I'm fed up with the voting system.

Why can't the mod downs get sent to osnews admins to check if they have be modded down correctly... obviously some may need to be checked with the person who voted down.

Too many people seem to think saying something against their fav OS is an insult, or disagreeing with the conclusions of an article... that's certain to get you down to minus 5 before half an hour is up.

Maybe the ratings comments have could be an option. Off by default. That way if you want to see what your peers think you can turn it on, if you don't you see everything with the rating hidden, so that it's more like a forum.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Coxy
by Adam S on Fri 8th Feb 2008 14:26 in reply to "Comment by Coxy"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Why can't the mod downs get sent to osnews admins to check if they have be modded down correctly

It used to work that way, but the volume got too high to maintain. Users already do a pretty good job of weeding out the trolls by themselves.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Coxy
by Coxy on Fri 8th Feb 2008 14:48 in reply to "RE: Comment by Coxy"
Coxy Member since:
2006-07-01

Yes, but they don't. what they do a pretty good job of is modding down anyone who says anything about microsoft in a linux article or anyone who says anything about linux in a ms article. Half the mod downs I see don't appear to meet any of the three reasons for modding down a post.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by Coxy
by Coxy on Fri 8th Feb 2008 15:04 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Coxy"
Coxy Member since:
2006-07-01

Why don't you give people the ability to hide posts that get over 5 mod ups in the same way you hide post that get minus 5? This would discourage people from just modding up anyone to 30 points who says anything anti MS, no matter what the theme of the article is. most posts I see that get over 20 pluses usually are jokes at a previous posters expense, insults concealed by clever wording and smileys or bashing someone elses opinion of an os.

Or limit the amount a post can get modded up to 5. Anyone who has been at os news for a while knows an easy way to an increase to your average point rating is to slag of MS in an article about ms, or linux in article about linux. If you can manage to make it funny, you get even more points. Most of the time these comments are off topic, insulting etc., so I don't see anything wrong with limiting them.

Or at least shwo the stats for how many people are modding up and down... that way I'd at least fell better knowing not everyone agrees that the post is so great it needs 30 points added to it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Coxy
by Adam S on Fri 8th Feb 2008 15:13 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Coxy"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Who cares? Does it really matter so much if a comment is over-modded? Don't be so serious about this crap - it's a website. Anyway, I think it's a little dramatic to say that every anti-Microsoft comment is granted a +30, when I can tell you for a fact it's not even close to true. I watch the super high and super low mods, and you'd be surprised how good a job users do on the whole.

If you're so upset, go vote on the votes at this URL:

http://osnews.com/comment-vote-review

and you can help people mod properly.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Coxy
by Adam S on Fri 8th Feb 2008 15:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Coxy"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Some examples that go against your theory:

Anti-Apple:
http://osnews.com/permalink?288229

Anti-Theo de Raadt (OpenBSD)
http://osnews.com/permalink?291645

Anti-Andrew Morton (Linux):
http://osnews.com/permalink?262003

Anti-Linux:
http://osnews.com/permalink?289192

Anti-OSNews users:
http://osnews.com/permalink?299884

Good comments are generally rewarded no matter who they discuss.

Reply Score: 1

tsume
Member since:
2006-07-24

This deals with many stories, not just the "How to Recognize a Good Programmer." Sure, people are comparing non-degree to degree, but then we get comments like...

It used to be that people with ADD were just called stupid. Being able to pay attention to things is part of what is generally considered "intelligence". Maybe we should also cater to people with "memory deficit disorders" and "positive attitude deficit disorders" because it's not their fault!


Above is where a user was being highly offensive, mainly to give himself an ego boost. Most likely someone else who didn't have a degree received a job which he was applying for, a very predictable attitude and response.

After you mod them down, they start whining making noise in the comments.

Reply Score: 1

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

This deals with many stories, not just the "How to Recognize a Good Programmer." Sure, people are comparing non-degree to degree, but then we get comments like...

"It used to be that people with ADD were just called stupid. Being able to pay attention to things is part of what is generally considered "intelligence". Maybe we should also cater to people with "memory deficit disorders" and "positive attitude deficit disorders" because it's not their fault!


Above is where a user was being highly offensive, mainly to give himself an ego boost. Most likely someone else who didn't have a degree received a job which he was applying for, a very predictable attitude and response.

After you mod them down, they start whining making noise in the comments.
"

Excuse me, how is that offensive? years ago kids with ADD were either classed as kids with high spirits or stupid; he is stating a pretty obvious fact. The fact that you've gone all precious tells me that you're too lazy to argue the issue and instead act like the child you are by using the moderation system.

Reply Score: 2

tsume Member since:
2006-07-24

Excuse me, how is that offensive? years ago kids with ADD were either classed as kids with high spirits or stupid; he is stating a pretty obvious fact. The fact that you've gone all precious tells me that you're too lazy to argue the issue and instead act like the child you are by using the moderation system.


Many kids in college take drugs for their ADD issues, so do many people in professions which require they be the most alert they can be on the job.

The person in question is a brick wall, no matter what you say, they'll not listen. You might as why people are like this, well it was a reply to someone who is professionally arrogant. I've plenty experience arguing against such people, and it is a lost cause.

On the above comment left by another, I did make a reply. Does a savant who is spectacular at mathematical equations make him stupid? no. Everyone is good at something, and may be skilled with difference activities.

The fact is, the reply is derogatory. Kids with ADD are not stupid, and it is ignorant to think every kid with ADD is less intelligent than someone with a medium-high intelligence.

Thinking back when I couldn't control my attention, I was definitely more intelligent than many. Most ADD works like bipolar, you can be great most of the day and all the sudden you start acting up.

I guess the major thing with people who left the comment, well... are just ignorant. People who only see black and white without actually studying a topic throughly

Reply Score: 1

Just some food for thought.
by BrendaEM on Sat 9th Feb 2008 16:58 UTC
BrendaEM
Member since:
2005-11-23

There is a difference between and unpopular opinion, and a comment that violates the spirit of the message board. Let's look at two comments:

1.) It's a pity that SCO lost the case.
2.) The people who ruined SCO should be executed.

Comment 1 would be an unpopular comment, but I believe they should be allowed their right to say it.

Comment 2 is different because it has a hurtful intent, and the intent is to hurt people.

Let's look at another set of comments.

1.) Apple invented the graphic user interface.
2.) Apple has the best graphic user interface.

Comment 1 is incorrect, and might mislead someone, but with comment 2, a new computer user should be able to differentiate that it is just an opinion.

Reply Score: 1