Despite all the angst, the Unrecommend option is having

[MineralMan]

very litte effect. Less than 24 hours after it was introduced, a look at the GD list shows that there are very few threads with <0 recommends.

So...it looks like everyone's back to normal again. They've stopped playing with the new toy, and have switched to playing with the box it came in.

If you doubt this, display the General Discussion list view.

Thanks, Skinner!

[LynneSin]

1. I tried pointing out that 4 of the top 6 greatest threads were about progressive issues

and the replies I got was that it was being manipulated to make us think it's working.

Another favorite: The threads supporting the new REC system had a much higher number of recs than those that opposed it (many were <0). People again assumed some sort of manipulation but refused to accept the idea that perhaps most DUers like the new system.

No clue why people can't just give this system a chance to see how it works.

[havocmom]

2. LOL There are manipulation theorists now?

Some people around here do not have enough real problems, do they?

:rofl:

Sad, though, to think people at DU would be so conditioned to protest change just for change's sake. How can progressives be so afraid to try.... :banghead:

[LynneSin]

3. those of us who support it are part of the right-wing DUers

DLC will also be using it to their manipulation too (which explains how that pro-Kucinich thread got on the homepage :eyes: ).

[havocmom]

12. LOL thanks for the update

I am having a really hard time taking a lot of people around her seriously at present. Just silly.

[MineralMan]

4. Well, the impression I got from some of the complaints

about the feature was that there are some DUers who believe their point of view is always correct, and how dare the hoi polloi unrecommend their pearls of wisdom. It is as though some believe that all who disagree with their particular point of view are "freepers" or "trolls."

I find that odd in a forum that celebrates clear thought and discourse.

I see the new feature as an egalitarian one, for what it's worth. Since the only effect is whether or not an OP appears on the Greatest Page, it seems to be much smoke but little heat.

[xultar]

5. +1 -----i can haz free speech?

[LynneSin]

6. I liked the concept that if I didn't like the post I should start a new thread of my own

Wait, what's wrong with debating WITHIN your thread and letting BOTH sides of the opinion have a voice if this is 'greatest-page worthy'.

[RoyGBiv]

9. Precisely ...

I rarely even start threads for this reason. I don't see the sense in populating a particular forum with umpteen threads about the same subject, just because I want to put *my* masterful brilliance at the top of the thread.

And frankly, that's what a great deal of this is about. Much (not all of course) but much of the complaining has come from people who do this a lot, often in ways that are assured to create as much vitriol as possible and attract a section of "fans" of the point of view who will REC it to the Greatest.

They don't get to do that now.

[MineralMan]

10. Yes. There seem to be a lot of threads started on

important issues that would be better placed in an existing thread. Every time there's a major news event, dozens of OPs are fired up, often with nothing but a general comment on that news. Most of those threads are DOA and don't get much attention, where a post in an existing, active thread would be read and discussed.

On the other hand, I started this thread. :shrug:

[kiva]

14. This is something I've wondered about before,

why not just make your argument in an existing thread? Often someone asks a question in one thread that someone else has already answered in another. Of course, we could always copy and paste them together, might make for an interesting exchange...:evilgrin:

[seaglass]

22. Nah it's more about the distaste for mob rule. Interesting that a site

that grew out of the need to give voice to the minority view for 8 years under Bush now promotes a feature to hide DU's minority view.

[WeDidIt]

7. What are you talking about? It's had a HUGE effect.

Not a single "Rec This Thread If You..." thread on the Greatest Page!

That alone is worth the price of admission.

[MineralMan]

8. Well, there is that benefit. I never did understand those OPs.

In fact, not only may it keep that silliness off the Greatest Page, it may keep people from posting such threads in the first place, and that would be a big plus.

[xultar]

11. Silliness is fun. People should be able to post what they want within the rules.

[MineralMan]

13. Sure. I have no problem with that.

However, I normally post my silliness in the Lounge, rather than in GD. I'm in no way dictating what people may or may not do. It's not my site, anyhow.

The Unrecommend dealie, however, may slow down some of the nonsense posts. That wouldn't be a bad thing in the serious part of DU. The Lounge remains available for silliness.

[WeDidIt]

15. Yeah, but how many people are going to Rec a "Rec This Thread" thread compared

to how many people will unrec it?

:evilgrin:

[xultar]

17. equal amounts...thus keeping it off the greatest page...THANK GAWD.

[WeDidIt]

19. Exactly!

And it works!

[BurtWorm]

16. The major effect it's having is proliferating the number of posts complaining about it.

:freak:

[MineralMan]

18. Oh, that will soon pass. It's the topic du jour, but

there will be a new one shortly. That's one thing that's constant on DU: the topic du jour always changes.

[Deja Q]

20. Define 'very few' - there are a handful on page one of 'general discussion' right now.

'very few', to me, means 'two', 'three', or maybe 'four'.

There are more than four visible right now. (Eleven. About 1/7th the total of page 1 alone.)

[dionysus]

21. i thought we were silenced. what happened?

[Orsino]

23. I'm guessing that only a minority of DUers know about it...

...and that only a minority of those recommend often enough to have taken advantage of the feature.

It's early day(s) yet, isn't it?