How is the forum rating system doing?

[strad]

Steven;
I don't do that, but I was told by one of the Mods that that was the appropriate use of the up or down votes, as a sort of plus one or thumbs up emoticon.
Sometimes someone's dissertation does not seem to require a lengthy response to show you stand with them on a subject.
I don't necessarily need a letter of support but sometimes a thumbs up or the like can make me feel like I'm not some lone voice carried away on the wind.
What is one to do?

[xpensive]

I find it interesting that members with 300+ upvotes never posted anything technical whatsoever, just a flurry of eloquent arguments and images, myself I gathered most of mine by posting images on my own threads, which tells a story I think?

The downvoting system doesn't work, not when you anonymously can downvote someone just because you dislike his views.

[MOWOG]

The downvoting system doesn't work, not when you anonymously can downvote someone just because you dislike his views.

Amen, brother. =D>

[Holm86]

The downvoting system doesn't work, not when you anonymously can downvote someone just because you dislike his views.

That's what I have been saying.

[bhall II]

Why does it matter? They're just numbers that change shape and nothing else.

[Cam]

It matters when you use votes as weapons to exclude any idea not in line with your own.

[Cam]

You agree that Schumacher deserves privacy, but you are arguing the family's motive for privacy is driven by making money?

Is it not possible for a person to disagree personally yet be adult enough to debate a point from an unbiased position?

Enough of rummaging in the gutter, inventing nefarious dark deals and shouting about "rights" to intrude on someone's grief. This thread needs some dignity. Game over.

I take offense at your insinuation. As a mod you need to be more impartial. Disagree, close the thread, ok, but your personal views should have no factor in it and they certainly should not be publicly stated, let alone targeted.

You just publicly denigrated us and I'm insulted. Thanks for the warm and inviting place to discuss ideas.

[bhall II]

Well, I didn't downvote you in the other thread, but I obviously have no control over how others respond.

Free will can be a real bitch sometimes, huh?

For what it's worth, I don't think upvotes validate a statement any more than I think downvotes invalidate a statement. They're just there.

[Cam]

So you disagree a statement from a member with a high reputation appears to have more merit than that from a member with a negative reputation?

FWIW - up voting one position with no merit while disregarding another with merit, is just as bad. I never down voted you at all in that thread either. Free will comes with some responsibilities.

[xpensive]

...

Enough of rummaging in the gutter, inventing nefarious dark deals and shouting about "rights" to intrude on someone's grief. This thread needs some dignity. Game over.

I take offense at your insinuation. As a mod you need to be more impartial. Disagree, close the thread, ok, but your personal views should have no factor in it and they certainly should not be publicly stated, let alone targeted.

You just publicly denigrated us and I'm insulted. Thanks for the warm and inviting place to discuss ideas.

While running the risk of being banned, again, I could not possibly agree more than I do Cam.

[bhall II]

So you disagree a statement from a member with a high reputation appears to have more merit than that from a member with a negative reputation?

FWIW - up voting one position with no merit while disregarding another with merit, is just as bad. I never down voted you at all in that thread either. Free will comes with some responsibilities.

Maybe I've just been around here too damn long, because I generally know what to expect from most folks, and it doesn't have all that much to do with the numbers that trail their names. I don't know how anyone else uses the feature, but I typically used voting to add my input to discussions in which I wasn't involved or when I learned something.

It's obviously meaningless, though. I formerly had an absurd number of points, but it was still said that I've "never posted anything technical whatsoever," which is patently false. Yet, it does illustrate how the system seems to foster resentment more than anything else.

In any case, I'm no longer going to vote one way or the other on anything. That's my "meta-vote" on the situation.

[Cam]

bhall - you've done an FIA. A knee jerk reaction to fix a problem that doesn't address the real issue, where a lighter touch with more thought would have yielded better results. The voting system can be good, but it needs to be balanced. Having a new member join and read a post from a high rep member - should give that new member confidence that what they're reading is good, would you agree?

By not participating you're not helping. The same 'free willed' members that up voted you, will continue to do so. There in lies the problem. Not the system. So will you simply create a new account every 20 votes?

Maybe up votes needs a 2 tier system? One for "I agree" and another for "technically correct and valid"? That would at least separate popular opinion, which is important, from technical goodness?

What do you think?

[bhall II]

Nah. If you look through the thread, you'll see I've been against it for a while. My reaction now is a response to a level of complaining that has increased lately such that it's starting to spill into other threads when folks see votes they don't like. That's irritating, and this sorta feels like washing my hands of it. (I'm weird. So, I don't expect it to make much sense to anyone else.)

I'm not worried about new members. This forum is not shy at all when it comes to quickly pointing out mistakes. Newbies will just have to read along and draw their own conclusions like we all did back in the old days (when we had to walk to and from school, uphill both ways, with no shoes, and through 3' of snow in 100°F heat).

[SectorOne]

Yea it´s a got damn mystery why the system is still up. Day in day out we get new evidence supporting the fact that the system does nothing to maintain order on the forums.

Moderators maintain order on forums, not a useless voting system.

[turbof1]

I think the upvote part never was a system to keep order, just to appreciate good work.

The downvote part looks to be used to keep order. In general that works. When someone goes into a rant people are ussually quick to prescribe a downvoting cure.

However, some cases show it doesn't always work correctly. Often when somebody makes an excellent post or piece, and he gets a lot of upvotes, chances are people who disagree will be more inclined to downvote. Nobody wants to be the jerk to give someone a total of -1, nobody would care if a 10+ goes to a 9+. A little bit of strange human behaviour.

Of course, we also have people like Bhall who are too shy to admit they are that awesome and deserve their votes. Bhall, like it or not, but you are forced to run for president, and people like you because you make the correct decisions. Maybe you'll put an end to NSA? And please solve world hunger while you are at it.