The new unrecommend function is a bad thing...

[Bicoastal]

...for people who take everything WAY too seriously.

For everyone else, it's no big deal.

[BlooInBloo]

1. I was fine before it. I'm fine with it. I'll be fine without it, if the whiners get their way.

[scheming daemons]

3. Yep.

Same here.


I like it... but if it goes away, no big deal.

[PretzelWarrior]

2. lolol. I just unrecommended your post for fun.

I think it's a fun little way when the gadflies come on here to post their garbabe, they not only get an argument on their hands with replies...we can also see the true level of people's agreement or disagreement with their sentiment.

If 6 of their little rowdy band get together and recommend their piece of shit attack on Obama, 25 of us can slam them by unrecommending them and they still get a nice little statement on their life "<0". bahahahha

[scheming daemons]

5. There is a 1=1 relationship between those that dislike Obama and those that dislike the new feature

...it seems.

[BlooInBloo]

9. Yep. The cowards just want immunity from criticism.

[Beetwasher]

Yes, Funny That!

The biggest whiners are those that post the most negative, inflammatory crap.

[lamp_shade]

14. +1

[rudy23]

I could say the same thing about people who like the feature and paid staffers.

Prove me wrong!

[PretzelWarrior]

22. why would I? I'm okay with you living in fantasy land.

if you think paid staffers are going to spend their time coming on here at all....that's already funny. I was told by scores that what is posted on here makes no difference. So why would "staffers" of yet unamed whoevers come on here at all?

Second, if they were paid to come here, wouldn't they primarily be focused on posting things to pump up whatever it is they like?
And wouldn't they get together and recommend each other's stuff so it would rise to the top?

And wouldn't the unrecommend be a way of showing the true voice of DU rather than some critical or cheerleading minority?

you just defeated your own arguments.

[BlooInBloo]

26. That's right... Everyone but that .0001% of incessant anti-Obama whiners are paid staff.

:rofl:

[Hutzpa]

28. +2

[Ikonoklast]

29. And for some funny reason, they all post together on the same threads, rec'ing them for each other.

Tyranny of a minority to make the greatest page.

The PM's must be a-flyin'.

[Cant trust em]

4. It's kinda funny how much angst this brought about.

I never go to the greatest page anyway.

[Mojambo]

6. I pretty much vote against whichever side is winning. n/t

[rateyes]

7. K & U

It's really fun to do that! :hi:

[lamp_shade]

15. Now that's funny - K&U. We'll be seeing this alot I'll bet.

[rateyes]

20. Yep. But, always remember, you heard it here first.

:evilgrin:

[lamp_shade]

41. I trust you won't mind if I use it now and then.

[rateyes]

43. I'd love to copyright it and charge premiums for people to use it.

But, I don't think Skinner will let me. :hi:

[SoCalDem]

42. or a new phrase.. "Goin' all Jayhawk" on a thread

[rateyes]

44. Or, if you changed it to U & K

then it would be called "wildcatting."



Which is hard for me to do, seeing as how I'm a Volunteer from Tennessee.

[rateyes]

45. And, I wouldn't mind "Going Ashley Judding" on a thread either:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

8. I only look at the Greatest Page in passing on my way through to the forums.

Honestly.

They should just get rid of the Greatest Page and be done with it.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

18. An admission -

the other day, someone PMd me about my post being on the Greatest Page.

I didn't know what the GP was, and had to figure it out.

I never looked at that, not since I found DU and registered.

So, now we have "unrecommend"?

Another thing not to notice..........................

[mullard12ax7]

10. Yep, like that suicidal veteran guy, jeez relax already!

Why does he take things so seriously?

[Bicoastal]

16. Case in point.

What does he have to do with the (inexplicably heated) debate over the recommend/unrecommend function?

[lindisfarne]

11. Shouldn't you EMAIL admin?n/t

[Hepburn]

12. Yeah, I have to agree with your sentiment.

It is my feeling this violates the spirit of one of the rules of the DU ~~ NOT to bash other DUers. The new system in essence allows for this. That is wrong. Hide thread was great. If you did not want to read about something, it worked very well...and so did the ignore feature.

IMO, this system makes for hurt feelings and nastiness. I vote to get rid of it ASAP.

JMHO

[PretzelWarrior]

17. no. This actually puts the "DEMOCRATIC" back into DU.

that way, someone can make more than a binary choice of recommend or don't recommend. by your implication, we could say that someone who got no replies or no recommends prior to this unrecommend couuld feel singled out and attacked.

Why not just focus on the content in people's posts if it bothers you so much? I think this is a great way to combat the disruptors' intent to convince us there is much more dissention and rancor in our group than there actually is.

[Hepburn]

21. Why not just look for the good and not just the slam?

Seems to me that slamming OPs is going to be the only result...and that makes me feel badly.

[BlooInBloo]

24. Why not look for the TRUTH about how people feel about a thread?

[Hepburn]

31. You really think all of the UnRs are for the truth?

LOL...:eyes:

[BlooInBloo]

33. Same goes for the R's, right?

[Hepburn]

36. For me, I only give an R if it is worth it.

If I do not like a thread, I hide it. To each his own. I do not believe in gang slamming others and I can see this coming from some who are a bit nasty when they can use the unR to get someone.

JMHO

[BlooInBloo]

39. BWAHAHAAHAHA!!!!

[Hepburn]

40. Welcome to my ignore list...

...apparently you are not adult enough for a real conversation.

:hi: Bu-bye...

[PretzelWarrior]

25. right now I see lots of posts getting recommended even at this moment

when "Unrecommend" is ripping the very fabric of our existence.

What is more, I see people commenting positively about the posts they enjoy.

[rudy23]

13. It gives groups too much power to knock stuff off the greatest page.

Before they could only rate things ahead. Now, this favors the bloggers who get paid to blog in teams.

[lamp_shade]

19. Which is why I like it. Too often I've seen the GP full of hate threads.

[MadHound]

23. Yet you yourself are taking it seriously enough to post an entire thread about it

Pot, I want you to meet kettle.

[Bicoastal]

27. My "entire thread" took me about ten seconds to write up...

And honestly, mostly I'm just amused by the number of people who seem personally offended by the possibility of a negative rating.

[MadHound]

30. Still, if you're not taking this as seriously as you claim,

Why have you posted this thread, and then do up a poll on the matter? Why not just simply post in one of the other myriad threads on the topic?

But yeah, you're not taking it seriously, OK:eyes:

[Bicoastal]

34. It hasn't emotionally affected me...

...I'm not claiming, for example, that this is an Orwellian plot by the DLC to silence dissent on the Internetz, as someone else has stated.

If you're defining "taking seriously" as "posting about it," then yeah, by that definition, I guess I am taking it seriously. I guess I take everything seriously that I post here.

But really, I'm mostly just highly amused. :hi:

[anigbrowl]

32. I'm really liking not having to click in a confirmation page any more to rec (or unrec).

[Hutzpa]

35. Another thing you are forgetting

is, this will help make the job a little bit easier for Mods too....

kthxbai

[Hepburn]

37. How?

All if does is give a thread a rating ~~ it does nothing for any obnoxious/nasty content.

[Obamanaut]

38. On the plus side, there are not many new MJ threads today. nt