Vote on the changes to DU.

[jillan]

This one's for you, Skinner.

Thought we should do this in a democratic manner.


on edit - rate it up so we can get it on the greatest, and get more votes.

Thank you:)

[HCE SuiGeneris]

1. IDK. YTBD.

[question everything]

27. Glad it was not during the primaries

Many would have been labeled "disruptive."

[Flabbergasted]

52. Love It, nt

[The Doctor.]

87. That would have been far better.

[tekisui]

2. I miss KNR! Nnow it's KNMR! or KNR! What's the difference between the two?

[Hissyspit]

3. Needs tweaking.

Need to still show ranking by number of recs and so far the difference between must-read and recommended is negligible. Also, what is the difference in practice between recommended and average. Why would anyone click on average?

Of course, it's only been a few hours.

And you need 'Needs Tweaking' in your poll as well as 'Other.'

[alittlelark]

5. a "must read" response.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

21. I think 3 categories would work -- Hell Yes! Yes! and No!

[backscatter712]

23. Needs tweaking++

I don't think the changes are all bad - the more rates, the merrier.

I think a lot of it is cosmetic - the icons should be shrunk down or compacted a bit - when there's an entire column of them, they take up a lot of room and create a bit of an angry fruit salad on the screen.

Make them smaller, and desaturate the colors a bit, and they should look better.

[Hissyspit]

24. No, I'm finding it confusing making sense of it.

So it's not just cosmetic for me. The first thing you see when you go to Greatest Page is the thread that has the highest average of Must Read recommendations, which MAY or MAY NOT mean much.

[Wednesdays]

25. I vote "average" on threads that are the same-old same-old

For example, the 999th thread on a subject would get an "average" or "skip" from me, even if the original subject was interesting.

I also rate threads that have trivial topics and/or have little impact upon the elections or political process as "average" or below.

[immoderate]

39. Ah, but that would be misleading to those readers who might have missed a topic...

the first time. It might be important, but you rated it average because you saw it already.

--IMM

[Beam Me Up]

65. Good point. n/t

[clear eye]

54. Shouldn't we be able to change our rating?

If we later see two better posts on the same subject, for instance, and want to change a rating from "must read" to "average", the way this has been implemented, we can't. I think this is a very important flaw, and needs revising. I think the overall idea is great and offers greatly improved information on readers' feelings.

[KoKo]

79. Yes....it needs tweaking. Too many choices and takes too much time..

Pluse those rectangles in bright color on the left are distracting. Needs to be simpler. Admins don't like the "star" raking system. Maybe they could do something with "emoticoms" instead of the stars. :shrug:

[tekisui]

4. KNA!

[CoffeeCat]

6. Changes schmanges...

What changes?

If I go to www.democraticunderground.com and I still see the same interactive
and amazing discourse--I'm happy.

I don't care if you change to a magenta interface with lime green accents and a flashing periwinkle
rating system that sits on an astro-orange background.

As long as DU exists, I'm set!

[MadrasT]

9. I would object strongly to magenta with lime green accents ;-)

I miss the "number of recs" counter, otherwise, it's not bad.

[Dukkha]

7. to quote Jay Sherman...

all this will do is encourage clique mentality

[Bluebear]

8. Can we try it for, oh, a day before deciding it's bad?

[Swamp Rat]

14. You must make up your mind NOW!

:nuke: URGENT!!! :nuke:

[PatSeg]

48. That is so cool!

And so appropriate.

[whatchamacallit]

57. Love it! Glad you're back. n/t

[livvy]

73. Love it! It is perfect! Well done, Swamp Rat! n/t

[Mind_your_head]

31. WE NEED AN ANSWER BY THIS FRIDAY!!!!!

OR WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE ROOTING AROUND ON ALL FOURS FOR ROOTS & BERRIES IN THE FOREST ~ AND RAISING CHICKENS! AND OUR ATM CARDS WILL STOP WORKING! AND RUSSIA AND CHINA ARE GOING TO TAKE OVER VENEZUELA!!

SO DECIDE IF YOU LIKE (you like them, right? p*rrrrrr) THE CHANGES OR NOT!!!!

:sarcasm: <------ hope that's not really necessary :-)

[kgnu_fan]

10. I think the rating column should be on the right side instead of left

so that it is not the first thing you have to deal with when we open the page. Great idea, quality vs. quantity rating system... but having the rating column at the left side is a little distracting, especially you just want to read first and not interested in rating it...

Anyway, thank you so much for contineous improvement effort you guys do here. Much appreciated!

[EFerrari]

59. I think you're right. n/t

[Karenina]

85. Using more subdued colours!

[Bonobo]

11. I vote 'A' for the idea and 'C -' for the execution.

Skinner,

You should keep it basically the same, but offer people a chance to also "derecommend" a thread.

If you feel the "Derec" power is too strong, you can set it at 50% or even 33% or 25% power of the "rec" vote.

-Bonobo

On edit: The color scheme, being reminiscent of the Bush/Rumsfeld Homeland Security Warning thingie can NOT be tolerated. Even as a joke. It hurts too much. I cannot even laugh.

[ihavenobias]

17. De-Rec power (or whatever) could easily be abused (isn't "Skip It" like a De-Rec?)

I personally wouldn't be a fan of de-rec'ng something unless it was totally egregious, but I fear that some would be mean spirited de-rec'rs.

Also, while the Greatest Page is arguably too big, this new format might just help the rich get richer so to speak. In other words, people who are part of the various popular circles (certain user names guarantee a certain number of views and recs regardless of the content) are much more likely to consistently have their stuff boosted into recommend/must read territory, creating even more of a view/rec/comment disparity than already existed.

But hey, that's just speculation and I'm not saying I'm against it, only that I'm skeptical in some ways...but I also think it's cool in other ways.

[OhioChick]

20. Good Points. n/t

[clear eye]

55. I think you misunderstand

The poster you are responding to meant that readers should be able change their rating from a favorable one to "average" or "skip it" if something, like reading better posts on the same subject later, changes their minds. I second the motion. He also wondered if a changed vote should count as much in the total rating as an original vote.

[ihavenobias]

93. (Shrug) Ok, so maybe I misunderstood the comment I was responding to but...

I stand by the points I made in response to it.

:)

[question everything]

94. Excellent points. Wish I could recommend that one (nt)

[Muttocracy]

80. I was off DU for a day and I had the same reaction to the color scheme today! nt

[slipslidingaway]

12. I did not vote as I'm still deciding, but the greatest page is less

useful IMO. New threads that make the recommended threshold used to be placed at the top, now they are somewhere near the bottom. Many of the threads posted in editorials barely made it to the greatest page, but at least they had a small window when they were at the top of the greatest page.

I do like having older threads eligible for recommendation and having the best of the past week available.

[jillan]

16. I think that's what's bugging me too.

There's no order on the Greatest page.

[slipslidingaway]

28. They are listed by thread ratings, I always used the greatest

page to see the new threads on the left hand side that recently made it to the greatest page, it was easy to scroll down and pick up the new threads. Now the same thread has been at the top for a few hours.

:shrug:

[jillan]

29. Me too, and then I would go over to the right hand side and read the threads with the most recs

and work my way down.

Now what am I gonna do?

[slipslidingaway]

30. We are not the only people who used the greatest page this way

so maybe they'll make an adjustment.

[pacalo]

13. Less is more. I preferred the original format.

The new system will encourage troublemakers & a clique mentality.

"Simplicity is a virtue that can hide almost anything."

[DeepModem Mom]

15. I really appreciate the obvious thought and effort that went into the change. I don't like...

to be negative, so I'll hold my initial reaction. Maybe I just need to get used to the new system.

ON EDIT: I see lots of problems with this. It doesn't work for me; maybe it does for others, however.

[Greyhound]

18. If this were really a discussion board it might be a revealing tool, but alas,

we are permeated with the idiocracy so I have to vote no.

[dailykoff]

35. cute couple!

"Gorgeous" doesn't do her justice.

[whatchamacallit]

58. Dennis gives me hope

not so much for the future of the country, but hope I could score a mega-betty like his wife:evilgrin:

[Swamp Rat]

19. I prefer a more simple system.

I don't know if I can handle these newfangled changes. :D

[McCamy Taylor]

22. Is this system a way to catch Freeper moles? Are they taking the names of people who negative rate

"good" solid Democratic stories and videos that should be front page items so that they can be kicked from DU? If so, then this is an ok system.

:headbang:

[bridgit]

26. 'Hate' is a bit strong, but I do find them a tad manipulative in ways I rebel against...

as a practical matter :shrug:

[WheelWalker]

32. "Do" or "Do Not". There is no "Try".

[New Earth]

33. maybe they can make it an option to turn it off?

So those that like the ratings can see them, and those who don't want to see them, don't have to. Maybe at least hide the rating on the topic page, not necessarily IN the post.

OR IF YOUR USING FIREFOX, YOU CAN ALWAYS HIDE THE IMAGES!!!

[goodgd_yall]

63. I like that idea. n/t

[kid a]

34. if they just moved the tags over to the far left they wouldn't be so annoying

[NYC_SKP]

36. I miss seeing the total number of recs, and being able to sort by number of recs.

I don't so much mind new features, but when they require losing old ones it's harder to accept the change.

[gateley]

37. One thing I DO like is not having to get any more of the

'Error. You already recommended that thread' messages.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

38. Can a 'hide' feature be included for those who liked the old format?

I appreciate the effort but this format to me sucks. And I liked seeing the exact rec numbers on the right side before entering the thread. This new format tells me nothing. And I think a message board should be simple and not so visually busy or flashy.

[thewiseguy]

40. Can they at least make the old format available to us?

I really do not like the changes. They are taking too much space and it is really unnecessary.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

43. They could get by with just one letter: "M" for Must Read, "R" for Recommend, etc.

You're right. There's absolutely no need to take up so much space on the left. If they moved letters or whatever they want to the extreme right where I wouldn't notice it, that would be fine with me. Learning the meaning of the letters would not be hard.

[iconicgnom]

41. It hasn't had a fair test yet.

I think it should be given a fair testing time, at least a week, perhaps two - with ongoing discussion, of course - before a "poll" is worth considering.

[FlyingSquirrel]

44. I was thinking the same thing. Too early to decide

And the old system definitely needed some improvements.

[lpbk2713]

42. Sorry Admins.

I know you guys put a lot of thought and a lot of work in to this project but it appears cluttered to me.

And I think in some cases it may be used as a popularity contest, something I have always disliked.

[Up2Late]

45. I rate this poll a Must Read!

This new system is NOT helping.

[Indenturedebtor]

46. I think it's great. It encourages people to really consider a post

I like it. I think that it does make DU more Democratic :applause:

[thewiseguy]

47. The ranking system is fine. They just need to move it to the right.

[Indenturedebtor]

51. That's a good idea n/t

[clear eye]

49. People who are upset about the changes will self-select to respond.

People who are satisfied won't bother. Despite OPer's good intentions, this poll is meaningless.

[PatSeg]

50. Like it!

I like change.

[orleans]

53. ugh. please skinner--put it back the way it was.

what if you recommend the thread and think people should read it as well? how do you vote? and how can i find out how many of each votes it got?

i no likie

[woo me with science]

56. Just scrap it now.

I am sorry you wasted all this effort, but please get rid of this crap and just let people talk.

We are adults and can decide for ourselves which posts are worth reading. We don't need popularity ratings to "help." Adults have always had the option of ignoring or alerting if a post truly deserves it.

All you are adding is the ability to label posts instead of responding intelligently to them. You are feeding into everything that can feel childish and mob-like at DU.

This is a truly sad, unnecessary addition to the site.

[shanti]

64. thank you

as you said, we don't need anyone to tell us what we need to read! it's a bit too manipulative to me :shrug:

[JCMach1]

60. Other: the placement of the rating affects readability

I BEG the admins to move it after the posting title.

[Beam Me Up]

61. I don't mind the ranking system and I DO appreciate that

posts in the dungeon are now eligible for recommendations. Thank you!

What I do NOT like is that it now takes so many recommends to get a thread to the "greatest" page AND that it is now limited to 50 threads. Up to now the "greatest" page was my book-marked portal into DU. There I could very quickly see a diversity of threads that had been recommended and choose the ones that looked interesting to me. It "moved" fairly quickly, too, so I could check in on it frequently and find new threads of interest. Now it seems nearly 'static'. There are many good threads that may never show up there and I now have to search individual forums to find them. More time consuming.

[goodgd_yall]

62. Something about the rating column

I find very distracting. Maybe it's the colors. My eye keeps going over there rather than to the thread subjects.

I didn't see anything broken, so I don't think any of the changes are necessary.

[Flabbergasted]

66. Habit. nt

[nam78_two]

67. I like it-it is an improvement

I wouldn't say I love it, but it is ok :shrug:. I guess I mostly don't care much either way...

[ecstatic]

68. "Skip It" is kind of rude, IMO.

I think all points of view should be heard. A must read post becomes obvious as the recommendations pile up.

The only changes people were requesting as far as I know were 1) a negative recommend, which could help flamebait/trolling posts be more easily identified; and 2) the ability to rate specific posts within a thread. :shrug:

[Kitty Herder]

69. Kick!

I don't like the new system.

[Raine]

70. Hate it...at least give us the option to hide it. nt

[Snazzy]

71. rating column is giant

and distracting. Can't it get small and go to the right somehow. Icon?

[Neshanic]

72. Not my board, so he can do whatever he wants. I don't get the problems people seem to have,

but that's just me.

[FLAprogressive]

74. I liked the old system better. nt

[bean fidhleir]

75. From a human-factors standpoint, it's busier and harder to deal with than it needs to be

Big words reversed out of big close-together color blocks are busy, especially since everything else is monochromatic.

The same 5-level rating system could be achieved more simply and partisanly by using small icons and exploiting "aerial perspective". For example: strong-contrast solid donkey, weak-contrast solid donkey, 30-50% grey blank, medium-contrast outline elephant, weak-contrast outline elephant.

Visually, the aerial perspective would signal values from "something here" to "nothing there", and the iconography would reinforce partisanship by associating donkeys with the "something" and elephants with the "nothing".

A mistake to be avoided would be to use blue for the donkey and red for the elephant. The red/blue dichotomy was decided by newspapers and signifies the party in/out of power, not Dem/GOP. If the Dems get into power this time, the Dems will once again be the red party. So that color scheme should be avoided both for that reason and because if the Dems don't get into power, you don't want to use red for the elephant because red is a "near" color and blue a "far" one. You want the elephant icon to be "far". So it's better to use monochrome.

Just a suggestion.

[immoderate]

76. I don't see any benefit.

Rather I see the new rating system as cumbersome and prone to be misleading in some cases.

--IMM

[-..__...]

77. My suggestion...

[slackmaster]

78. I like voting. More opportunities to vote makes my life better.

Vote early, vote often!

[alfredo]

81. Conservatives do not like change

[Muttocracy]

82. Not sure yet - but what happens when traffic goes way up? nt

[marions ghost]

83. I suggest

use the green "recommend" bar ONLY with the flames, so that it denotes high number of recs.

[Naturyl]

84. I had to vote "hate it" for the moment, because it needs work.

There needs to be an option to hide/disable it, at least on the thread listing page.

[Batgirl]

86. I guess I don't really get why anyone needs to be aware of whether I approve/disapprove of a thread.

Probably due to my own lack of enthusiasm for wielding the little gavel.

It also seems inevitable, as others have pointed out, that group psychology will come into play and the entire mechanism of formulating ratings and viewing threads through the prism of how they have been rated by others actually becomes a focus of energy unto itself.

Then again, I could be full of shit and this could turn out to be a useful feature for most DUers.

[The Backlash Cometh]

88. It's too anal.

The ratings are okay, just give us the threads in the order they make it to the Greatest page, like before.

[WA98296]

89. Kicking.

[here_is_to_hope]

90. Just yuck.

[D23MIURG23]

91. I like having a negative rating, or "unrecommend"

But I don't see the point of having gradations, and I miss the aesthetics of the old system.

[question everything]

95. Why?

If you don't like it, don't read it, or just move to the next topic.

Funny how we have "rules" against calling out other DUers, yet giving a post a "disruptive" or "skip it" is part of the system even though this is what it is doing.

If you don't like a post and have nothing to contribute why do you have to trash it? What if you are just in a sour mood? What if you just don't like the OP becuase... we've seen it.. he is new?

[D23MIURG23]

99. Because I've seen more inflammatory and divisive crap make it to the front page than I like.

An un-recommend function allows those of us who aren't mods work to prevent that. I don't necessarily like the terms "skip it" or "disruptive" for this purpose though. What I would prefer would be a simple question: "should this be on the greatest page?", yes would add a star and no would subtract one. That way 80 people with an extreme viewpoint can't speak for all of us.

[intheflow]

92. Other - somewhere in between love and hate it.

I like the rating system except for "skip it" and "disruptive" because the former is subject to abuse and the the latter is redundant since we have the alert button.

I wouldn't mind the new GP layout, but there should be more than the top 50 threads because much space is taken up with duplicate stories that have been posted in multiple forums. If there were only one of those stories on the GP, the Top 50 would be fine, as everyone would vote up that one story and other worthy stories could rise to the Top 50. But as it is, there's almost always at least two duplicate sources/stories of the top stories floating around DU: one from LBN and one from GD or GDP; sometimes more if it's also in Editorials, Political Videos, etc. Since it would be nearly impossible for the mods to track, much less police, duplicate stories in different forums that make it to the GP, it seems only right to increase the number of posts that can be on the GP. I mean, I read a lot of really interesting posts with only 10 or 15 recs on the old GP because of the chronological listing and the unlimited number of posts allowed; I worry at the lack of story diversity the new GP allows.

[FSogol]

96. My biggest problem is that it adds a negative conotation

to average posts.

Some people have been voting disruptive on anything they dislike, not necessarily against things that should be alerted on. Someone has even been hitting disruptive on anti-Palin posts.

Also, skip it is used for threads that might not interest one person, but might be a topic of interest for someone else.

Why add negative connotations (disruptive, skip it, and average) to posts that are of interest?

Save recommend or must read and everything else can be not rated. Disruptive threads be blocked by hitting the alert button.

[Xithras]

97. Don't like.

The new images are too big, and I've completely quit using the Greatest page because the sorting method makes no sense.

Even worse, I browse DU on my PDA a lot. The new Rating images are so big that they now cause nasty scrolling issues on the small screen. It's almost unusable there. I can turn images off and browse it that way, but I'm not willing to reconfigure the browser for one site.

[annabanana]

98. like the ratings.. don't like the static "greatest" page... n.t