The Thanks System

WhiteMemento9

Why is the feature enabled so only people who agree with a post can add an upvote rather than having an upvote and downvote to give a balance on what people who read it think of the post. Herd thinking isn't generally something I subscribe towards but I find the current system of little relative value in showing anything.

When a load of people thank a post it just suggests that an echo chamber exists of people who agree with that opinion but I often wonder how many people are on the other side of the fence. A separate option outside of the up/down vote with, I haven't thought about it much would also be cool. I understand maybe it is felt that if someone disagrees they will engage back rather than just giving a downvote which adds to the conversation but often that just creates noise of repeating opinions and arguments.

kneemos

Been beating that drum a few times.
It would clean up the gibberish and make it way more readable, particularly AH.

WhiteMemento9

kneemos wrote: »

Been beating that drum a few times.
It would clean up the gibberish and make it way more readable, particularly AH.

The only logical thing I can see is that it discourages people from giving contrary opinions because of the downvoting it will inevitably receive. I think though if you are comfortable in what you believe that won't matter. It does mean though in the reddit system that the herd mentality of the most liked post comes to the top which I am not a fan of doing. Just because something is considered the current correct way of thinking doesn't mean it should be accepted blindly and promoted as some kind of top answer. I can figure that out for myself but I do like when browsing a thread to see what kind of weight of opinion is out there towards a post.

Boards.ie: Mark

Thanks for your feedback, WhiteMemento9.

Before the thanks system, people would quote the relevant post they agreed with and simply add a +1, which didn't really contribute to discussion. You've hit the nail on the head as to why, I believe, a downvote button hasn't been added so far. The aim is to encourage debate and discussion rather than having people just downvote (and perhaps that would mean hiding) posts that they disagree with.

Downvotes on *whisper it* the other site were meant to combat off-topic posting. That is a useful function, but instead it's used by many users to hide unpopular opinions.

Debating, especially on the internet, isn't always perfect but sometimes you need to see and hear differing points of view. And if the same person is responsible for the gibberish, it may be time to add them to your Ignore list.

Nody

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

Why is the feature enabled so only people who agree with a post can add an upvote rather than having an upvote and downvote to give a balance on what people who read it think of the post. Herd thinking isn't generally something I subscribe towards but I find the current system of little relative value in showing anything.

When a load of people thank a post it just suggests that an echo chamber exists of people who agree with that opinion but I often wonder how many people are on the other side of the fence. A separate option outside of the up/down vote with, I haven't thought about it much would also be cool. I understand maybe it is felt that if someone disagrees they will engage back rather than just giving a downvote which adds to the conversation but often that just creates noise of repeating opinions and arguments.

You're confusing the point of the system; the reason for the thanks only system is to avoid +1 posts which were common before this. That meant someone makes a good post and in the next 20 posts 18 might be quoting the post and simply say +1. The thank you function is intended to remove that type of posting from the threads.

And if you think it's an echo chamber with only having up votes think how it would turn out if the clique you're claiming are upvoting also can downvote any opposition? That would really turn things into an circle jerking echo chamber as the clique can work on suppressing any dissent while constantly upvoting their own clique posts. The only way to overcome that then is to have an even bigger clique to counter it all

Is it perfect? Of course not but for it's intended job (remove +1 posts) it works as far as I can see.

kneemos

Boards.ie: Mark wrote: »

Thanks for your feedback, WhiteMemento9.

Before the thanks system, people would quote the relevant post they agreed with and simply add a +1, which didn't really contribute to discussion. You've hit the nail on the head as to why, I believe, a downvote button hasn't been added so far. The aim is to encourage debate and discussion rather than having people just downvote (and perhaps that would mean hiding) posts that they disagree with.

Downvotes on *whisper it* the other site were meant to combat off-topic posting. That is a useful function, but instead it's used by many users to hide unpopular opinions.

Debating, especially on the internet, isn't always perfect but sometimes you need to see and hear differing points of view. And if the same person is responsible for the gibberish, it may be time to add them to your Ignore list.

The "other site"doesn't hide unpopular opinions,it has sequential posting just like boards.
Seems to work really well at eliminating the crap and has a way more mature level of posting imo. In fact the difference is stark compared to AH.

WhiteMemento9

I am not suggesting that the system should do anything other than give a weighted average beside the post of the cumulative number that represented the up/down. It doesn't move the post anywhere, it doesn't let people hide it etc. You seem to be protecting people from themselves which I find quite odd. You are saying that you will arbitrate what people read by forcing them to see opposing opinions. That seems quite Orwellian. I trust people to make up their own minds about posts they want to hide etc. What I would like to know as a poster is what is the general feeling towards opinions as I think that adds value to the discussion. I can read something that has been highly downvoted and work out for myself if I agree or disagree but I find it of value to know what the general attitude is towards something. I trust other people to do the same rather than protecting them from themselves.

LoLth

Personally, if someone did not like an opinion I posted I would prefer to read an actual reason why they didnt agree and possibly learn something I didnt know or wasnt aware of rather than just see a pile of -1 votes.

If I post something that everyone agrees with then , again, I would prefer to see a thanks instead of a thread of "me too" , "+1", "lol" etc.

the thanks-only button allows for both of these. I dont know if thats exactly why it was implemented that way but , for me, it works.

dudara

We had a +1/-1 system here on Boards in the past but it got canned as it essentially turned into a sh*tfest. Posts were being “-1’d” just to harass posters, gang up on them etc. It wasn’t really used to share critical dislike but actually instead created more of the gang/herd mentality.

I’d have to search through Feedback to see if we had discussion on it back then. But personally, I don’t think we need that back on Boards. We can do better than that through discussion .

WhiteMemento9

LoLth wrote: »

Personally, if someone did not like an opinion I posted I would prefer to read an actual reason why they didnt agree and possibly learn something I didnt know or wasnt aware of rather than just see a pile of -1 votes.

If I post something that everyone agrees with then , again, I would prefer to see a thanks instead of a thread of "me too" , "+1", "lol" etc.

the thanks-only button allows for both of these. I dont know if thats exactly why it was implemented that way but , for me, it works.

Well, this feeds back into why a more nuanced approach holds value. If a post gets highly upvoted and I agree with that post then I just add a thanks. It would hold high value to me to see the groundswell of opinion against it rather than believe it is the prevailing logic and I would feel the urge to maybe explain things further. If I see a post that has been highly downvoted that I agree with then I would likely try an offer an opinion maybe I think the poster missed in explained his idea. The current system fosters one side of the conversation in my view.

WhiteMemento9

dudara wrote: »

We had a +1/-1 system here on Boards in the past but it got canned as it essentially turned into a sh*tfest. Posts were being “-1’d” just to harass posters, gang up on them etc. It wasn’t really used to share critical dislike but actually instead created more of the gang/herd mentality.

I’d have to search through Feedback to see if we had discussion on it back then. But personally, I don’t think we need that back on Boards. We can do better than that through discussion .

Maybe people do need protecting from themselves

Boards.ie: Mark

kneemos wrote: »

The "other site"doesn't hide unpopular opinions,it has sequential posting just like boards.
Seems to work really well at eliminating the crap and has a way more mature level of posting imo. In fact the difference is stark compared to AH.

Sequential posting is certainly a view offered, though not the default. Unpopular opinions are not hidden if posted as a reply, it seems, but downvoted comments will be hidden if posted as a main branch. Apologies.

As for mature discourse, it depends on the forum/subreddit I don't know if AH was ever pitched as a place for mature discussion - the default responses from back in the day would suggest otherwise At the moment, it's caught in a strange place, I will acknowledge that.

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

I am not suggesting that the system should do anything other than give a weighted average beside the post of the cumulative number that represented the up/down. It doesn't move the post anywhere, it doesn't let people hide it etc. You seem to be protecting people from themselves which I find quite odd. You are saying that you will arbitrate what people read by forcing them to see opposing opinions. That seems quite Orwellian. I trust people to make up their own minds about posts they want to hide etc. What I would like to know as a poster is what is the general feeling towards opinions as I think that adds value to the discussion. I can read something that has been highly downvoted and work out for myself if I agree or disagree but I find it of value to know what the general attitude is towards something. I trust other people to do the same rather than protecting them from themselves.

The thanks/downvote idea has been discussed previously, but after a disastrous experiment with reputation people are slow to trial it again. Thanks gives some indication as to general opinion (not a flawless system), as contrasting points will have varying levels of support in the Thanks tab. Aside from that, it does require digging into the meat and bones of a post and those that refer back to it.

kneemos

Boards.ie: Mark wrote: »

Sequential posting is certainly a view offered, though not the default. Unpopular opinions are not hidden if posted as a reply, it seems, but downvoted comments will be hidden if posted as a main branch. Apologies.

No. They have five or six different (choice) display options. Sequential posting,the same as here is one of them,as is the down voting option.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Reddit has this. If that’s your preference off you pop.

I’ve seen forums destroyed by this as they become echo chambers. The downvoted posters just leave.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Franz Von Peppercorn

kneemos wrote: »

Been beating that drum a few times.
It would clean up the gibberish and make it way more readable, particularly AH.

It would in fact disappear a lot of your posts since they aren’t very popular.

What do people think will happen?

WhiteMemento9

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It is an issue on reddit because of the size of the forum. Reddit has far more incredible posts than here and if you can't see that you haven't been using it properly or looked hard enough. Ireland doesn't have a monopoly on good posters. The bigger the forum gets though the sense of community gets less and less and the noise increases. In many threads, it isn't feasible for people to view things in chronological order due to reading many threads would take half a day. That isn't so much of an issue on boards.

WhiteMemento9

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

It would in fact disappear a lot of your posts since they aren’t very popular.

What do people think will happen?

Have you read the rest of the thread before posting. The posts would remain in chronological order.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

WhiteMemento9

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

My point of view on the value of the system I have already expressed earlier in the thread. I was replying as the OP to your point about it changing the forum to a reddit style. I do understand you were replying to a point about it making the forum more readable but your explanation on why that wouldn't be the case is misguided because it wasn't what this thread is about.

kneemos

Patww79 wrote: »

What do you mean more readable? Last thing anyone needs is this place infected with that Reddit rubbish of posts not in chronological order.

Gibberish gets disliked,the gibberish posters stop posting gibberish.

Simples.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

WhiteMemento9

kneemos wrote: »

Gibberish gets disliked,the gibberish posters stop posting gibberish.

Simples.

That is not at all why I made this thread but it seems it is why as explained by a mod the system doesn't work

kneemos

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

That is not at all why I made this thread but it seems it is why as explained by a mod the system doesn't work

I agree. It doesn't make any sense to just have a thanks button and not the opposite.

artanevilla

In my view, the purpose of the thanks is to first of all thank someone for some information etc . Boards is not just about arguing/debating.

For the later the thanks is for agreeing with someone, if you don’t agree, make a post stating why you don’t.

The purpose of the downvote on Reddit is to downvote WRONG information, not information you don’t agree with or don’t like. Unfortunately it doesn’t work like that in real life however.

Twat-Badger

This is a silly idea. It's a pity that Boards doesn't have some sort of button I could click that would enable me to highlight the fact that I think it's a silly idea.

WhiteMemento9

artanevilla wrote: »

In my view, the purpose of the thanks is to first of all thank someone for some information etc . Boards is not just about arguing/debating.

For the later the thanks is for agreeing with someone, if you don’t agree, make a post stating why you don’t.

The purpose of the downvote on Reddit is to downvote WRONG information, not information you don’t agree with or don’t like. Unfortunately it doesn’t work like that in real life however.

I explained in an earlier post though why I feel this fosters the conversation is one direction only. I completely see through that introducing the feature has been tired and it became a way for people to use mob mentality to victimize certain points of view. That may be justified in certain instances but it has huge negative as well so I can see how the current system is maybe the lesser of the evils.

Franz Von Peppercorn

kneemos wrote: »

Gibberish gets disliked,the gibberish posters stop posting gibberish.

Simples.

But that would be you, right? You are a poster people make fun of. They had to give you your own thread to get you to stop asking stupid questions in other threads.

Downvoting achieves nothing. If you don’t like a post argue your point.

kneemos

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

But that would be you, right? You are a poster people make fun of. They had to give you your own thread to get you to stop asking stupid questions in other threads.

Downviting achieves nothing. If you don’t live a post argue your point.

I, I'm frankly shocked!

pleas advice

I enjoy the odd downvote on Reddit, I get more satisfaction out of one heavily downvoted post than I would out of many moderately upvoted ones

Canis Lupus

kneemos wrote: »

The "other site"doesn't hide unpopular opinions,it has sequential posting just like boards.
Seems to work really well at eliminating the crap and has a way more mature level of posting imo. In fact the difference is stark compared to AH.

Crap in whose opinion? The group that decides what it wants to see or actual crap?

Leave things the way they are.

EDIT as as someone said the last time no one would ever get to see your posts if this was implemented.