Vote to disagree!

[DukeofRealms]

- snip -

I was of the same thought as you when I implemented the system. However, the negative ratings were removed after a lot of opposition and abuse. A disagree type rating may be added back into the system, but it will require some thorough testing and valid feedback from the community.

If a negative rating is going to be added back in, the faction forums will have it disabled, as I already know how that story ends.

Neutral ratings, don't really add any value to the system. They were being tested, but when the system is looked over again, they will likely be removed.

As for the mods doing their jobs, they do their jobs. It's not and was not their decision to remove negative ratings (although, input from them is put into consideration).

What's being thought about

• Adding some form of disagree rating back into the system
• Removing neutral ratings
• Removing certain ratings for faction areas
• Removing the ability to see who issued a rating on a post (preventing rating wars)

What has been done

• Removal of member rating leaderboard, greater emphasis on the post instead of the user.

 

[Comr4de]

Can't you just ban members who abuse from the rating system entirely?

 

[DaveC9000]

@Planr You can call these forums a statistic gathering mechanism or whatever you want, but at the end of the day it's just a bunch of people talking to each other. Conversation is the heart of what's going on here and that makes it the most relevant factor in the forums construction IMO. If you hear and understand what people are saying then you'll know what they think. One of the powers that these forums gives us is the ability to work problems out amongst each other. That's not possible if we don't communicate our thoughts. If these ratings are not adding to that process and they're causing problems elsewhere then they are a distraction from the actual forum. Conversation and agreement are irrevocably tied together and cannot be separated. How is this not relevant?

@ToyotaSupra Somebody's got to be that guy. Why not us?

 

[Kojinus]

Can't you just ban members who abuse from the rating system entirely?

In theory we could, but that'd be a pain.

 

[Valiant70]

Clicking on a thumbs-down button and marking a statement as disagreed is not criticism, nor is it constructive. You are not critiquing the other person's point of view just by saying "I disagree". If you really want to apply your thoughts to the conversation you must explain WHY you disagree, and if you want them to take you seriously that reason must make sense. The idea being that I have an idea that won't work and you explain to me why it won't work and I then come to understand that your information is factual and adjust my idea accordingly. Look at this very conversation as an example. People quote things like:



...and right beneath it they put their rebuttal statement which essentially explains why they disagree:

Although this statement may be true it is everyone's duty to treat each other with empathy and compassion. People with mental health problems can't always control how they react to situations whereas we should be able to.

If I had just said "I disagree" I'm not adding anything to the conversation.

I disagree with you.

 

[Snk]

A disagree button is important because it allows more people to contribute their opinion with less effort, thus a better understanding of what the community thinks. Also, screw diapers. I want to be able to %&$&$(!*@$&! and %&*(#$&@#(*%&@#( all I %&#*(%@#& want to.

 

[der_scheme]

Neither is a "like" or an "agree" button constructive or contributing to the conversation. This point you're making here in these two sentences is not relevant to the purpose of a rating system.

The difference between "Agree" and "Disagree":

• Agree: I think the poster makes a compelling/sound argument. There is no need explaining why, because I would just reiterate what has been staed.
• Disagree: I think the poster has made an error/fallacy/is stupid/is wrong in another way. This time I do have to explain why, because it obviously has to be pointed out where stuff went wrong.

• Removing certain ratings for faction areas

That doesn't prevent hate-ratings. It's easy to get a list of all posts by a certain user—rating those instead would work, too, and will most likely be done.

 

[Vengeance42]

OT: I would like a "dislike"button for server voting, and if you dislike the server, you get 50% more money than for liking it.

I would eagerly go around to every vote server and vote dislike.

I realize the logic of server voting mandates that they take credits FROM you if you vote to dislike.

Maybe it could also be implemented to remove 100k credits from you every hour that you dont vote.

Also, if possible, have the server sections divided up into 2 types of servers, label them "bribe" and "no bribe" servers.

 

[DukeofRealms]

The difference between "Agree" and "Disagree":

• Agree: I think the poster makes a compelling/sound argument. There is no need explaining why, because I would just reiterate what has been staed.
• Disagree: I think the poster has made an error/fallacy/is stupid/is wrong in another way. This time I do have to explain why, because it obviously has to be pointed out where stuff went wrong.

That doesn't prevent hate-ratings. It's easy to get a list of all posts by a certain user—rating those instead would work, too, and will most likely be done.

I know it doesn't, but it does prevent faction issues with recruitment threads and whatever else is there.

Also, it's just another method we're thinking about to make sure the best system is in place. What I have said, is not happening right now, it's just being thought about.

OT: I would like a "dislike"button for server voting, and if you dislike the server, you get 50% more money than for liking it.

I would eagerly go around to every vote server and vote dislike.

I realize the logic of server voting mandates that they take credits FROM you if you vote to dislike.

Maybe it could also be implemented to remove 100k credits from you every hour that you dont vote.

Also, if possible, have the server sections divided up into 2 types of servers, label them "bribe" and "no bribe" servers.

Server voting, if you're talking about an online server list, we don't run one.

 

[Azurite]

My only two cents (that I've been repeating for a while now) is that we need to move away from the way the rating system is currently. It could be fixed a matter of ways. Remove all fluff ratings excluding "like", or reinstate the "Negative" rating and remove neutral and negative ratings from forum areas with histories of tension (looking at you, Factions and Servers).

So the question stands, which option do we choose?

 

[DukeofRealms]

My only two cents (that I've been repeating for a while now) is that we need to move away from the way the rating system is currently. It could be fixed a matter of ways. Remove all fluff ratings excluding "like", or reinstate the "Negative" rating and remove neutral and negative ratings from forum areas with histories of tension (looking at you, Factions and Servers).

So the question stands, which option do we choose?

I'd suggest you make a poll.

 

[ToyotaSupra]