Unrecommending a post /is/ silencing someone.

[LoZoccolo]

It silences a person who recommended a post.

You can pretend that no one likes a post that someone recommended, but someone does.

[LoZoccolo]

1. Someone has already recommended this post, and another person unrecommended it.

Someone has been silenced.

[Deja Q]

2. I R'd it back...

Sorry some dirty asswipe wanted to unrec it. Yours is clearly a serious thread and worth a legitimate conversation; your point is not just valid, it hits the nail on the head.

[Deja Q]

4. Damn - the dirty As are crawling out of the woodwork in force today...

:(

[Laelth]

3. Not only that.

Why else would we have an "unrec" button if not to stifle and silence unwanted, undesirable, or unpopular speech? The thing serves no other function.

It's fine as a tool to clean up the Greatest Page, and it's OK for us to want to silence (or hide) speech with which we disagree, but let's at least be honest about what we're doing.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Deja Q]

7. Tsk tsk... honesty is bullshit when toeing the populist line is what matters most.

:(

[Hepburn]

11. +1....n/t

[Uncle Joe]

35. If that's the concern, I belive the Greatest Page could be cleaned to some degree by just

requiring more recommendations to make it.

D.U. has grown in size so requiring more recommendations to make the Greatest Page seems a logical extension to me without the negative aspect of neutralizing members' enthusiasm for any given issue or subject.

I believe the Republicans believed in the "Silent Majority" as their base, I hate to see us do the same.

[Laelth]

60. That's an excellent idea. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[WillyT]

65. BINGO !!!

Exactly!

:banghead:

[sandnsea]

5. That's the point

The community might decide somebody needs to be silenced on occasion. So bfd.

[Deja Q]

16. People don't even know what a "community" is anymore.

And if you try to tell them, you're called a "communist".

Sadly, I am not joking.

(being pro-community does not make one a communist... amongst a bunch of other things... one way or the other, there's just no way to win. Kobyashi Maru... only via an internet discussion forum where wankers with the biggest egos and smallest willies tend to win at playing "Pied Piper".)

[Warren Stupidity]

6. k&u

Every time you unrecommend a post a kitteh dies!

[greguganus]

12. I see your unrec and ante up with a rec. Call! n/t

[Occam Bandage]

8. Just like a vote for a Democrat disenfranchises a Republican voter? nt

[MercutioATC]

9. Oh, for fuck's sake. Who fucking cares?

The only people "harmed" are the teenage girls here that use the "Greatest" page as their "Mirror, mirror, on the wall". (and I mean no offense to teenage girls)

Anybody so focused on being one of the "cool kids" on a political forum should probably be seeking counseling.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. Do you know any good counselors?

:shrug:

[and-justice-for-all]

21. +1

[redqueen]

22. !

*dies*

[sandnsea]

23. Aw for fucks sake

They've got me agreeing with you!!!

:banghead:

:rofl:

[MercutioATC]

27. Did the planets all line up or something?

We might disagree with 95% of what the other says, but there's ALWAYS common ground somewhere.

It just took something really stupid for us to agree :)

[Tan Gent]

28. Bingo!

:D

[Laelth]

33. Obviously, a great number of people care.

You included. Otherwise you wouldn't spend the energy writing about it here.

And who made you the Supreme Judge of what I and others ought to care about?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[MercutioATC]

34. I answered you in my OP.

My invitation to ignore my post stands here, too.

[Laelth]

37. Thanks.

:)

:dem:

-Laelth

[LostInAnomie]

49. Amen!

[hack89]

70. + 1 nt

[Forkboy]

10. That's a shit statement.

:rofl:

[scheming daemons]

15. +1!

[LoZoccolo]

24. -1

Now you know how it feels.

[scheming daemons]

26. You're right... it feels awful. I've been silenced.

In fact, I don't think my keyboard will continue to work anym

[WeDidIt]

32. -1

Now you're less than nothing.

:evilgrin:

[BlooInBloo]

39. +1 - Now you're silenced.

[redqueen]

42. - 1

Now you're *double* silenced. Take that!

[BlooInBloo]

44. Aha! I see you've played plus-ies/minus-ies before!

[BlooInBloo]

13. Just like voting 'no' silences me when I vote 'yes'...

Oh wait - no it doesn't silence me.

[scheming daemons]

14. Maybe the rec was silencing someone who UNrec'd first!

[WI_DEM]

18. On the other hand the recommend key recommends a post that other people may not like

It silences people who do not agree with the post. You can pretend that no one dislikes a post that someone recommended, but someone does.

My solution? Get rid of both recommend and unrecommend.

[and-justice-for-all]

19. When a thread is Recommneded...

it makes it possible for the thread to be considered for the Greatest page; just because a thread as negative recommendations does not mean it will be removed from the board.

So, your dead wrong about Unrecommendation, the person is not at all being silenced or having their free speech rights trampled on.

[redqueen]

20. Hahahahahahaha

[Confusious]

25. Not all noise is equal

I may like the sound of birds singing, but someone taking a gaseous dump I don't want to hear.

This post is a gaseous dump.

[Spider Jerusalem]

29. No it's not, and no it doesn't.

And maybe 'unrecommend' wouldn't have been implemented if people didn't recommend the most inane bullshit in the first place. But then I regard the recommend feature and the greatest page as stupid and useless, anyway. You want your voice heard? Post a response. Sure, it takes more work and requires more thought than just clicking 'recommend this post', but you have the option, no-one is taking it away from you, and you sure as hell aren't 'silenced'.

[KatyMan]

30. Good fucking grief

It silences a person who recommended a post.
You can pretend that no one likes a post that someone recommended, but someone does.

Does a thread go away if it's unrec'ed? No.
Does it get moved to a different forum? No.
Does it get translated into gibberish code so no one can read it? No.
Does it go the greatest page? No.
Does it silence the person posting it? No.

I cannot believe adults are actually arguing against this so vehemently. I don't rec or go to the greatest page. I don't base my reading of threads on DU on how many recs it has or doesn't have. Maybe unrec haters should realize that the rest of us on DU have brains, free thought, and the ability to read every fucking thread that's posted on the DU whether it has 50 recs, 50 unrecs or none at all.

Truly, what's behind all of this? Vanity? Insecurity?

[Confusious]

31. recommending a post /is/ silencing someone.

It silences a person who unrecommended a post.

You can pretend that someone likes a post that someone unrecommended, but no one does.

[Uncle Joe]

36. Anyone not agreeing with a post is free to post a counter thread, and both can be

taken in to account.

By unrecommending, the majority can *silence the minority on any given subject or issue, sometimes the minority is correct, I would even venture to say, many times the minority leads the way.

*By silencing, I mean from the Greatest Pages and probably some readership consideration as some people use recommendations for a guide.

[Ms. Toad]

41. You have a very odd definition of silencing someone.

The author made the post. It is still there. People are discussing it. It floats up and down on the front page of the forum based on the activity in that forum, and eventually floats onto the second page where it most likely dies fairly quickly. My recommendation (or unrecommendation) doesn't change any of that.

In fact, I would go so far as to say failing to post in a particular thread is contributing much more silencing someone than unrecommending someone (and even that would be a stretch) since failing to post allows the thread to fall onto the second page, or third page, and landing on the second page on a slow day or on the third page on most days means death (i.e. silence).

I'm just glad all of the popularity contest threads aren't greeting me when I log on to DU. It makes me much happier to just skip over the one line titles when I encounter them in the forums I do visit than to be smacked in the face with them every time I enter DU.

[Control-Z]

45. Thank you.

I didn't have the patience to spell it out as you have. Unless someone is new to DU it would seem obvious.

Unless a thread is responded to, it dies. And, frankly, once a thread makes it to the greatest page, it can be all but lost once it goes below the fold. I check above the fold, the top recs to the right, and the most recent recs to the left, and then move on to forums where I often make my choices based on the number of responses to a thread. Unless there are enough recs to make it to the top of the greatest page, it seems to be almost a disadvantage to be recommended. I seldom scroll the greatest page or past the first page of any forum.

Replies are what keep a topic active.

[Uncle Joe]

46. To the contrary, I believe the popularity contests have been empowered,

the majority has the capability to keep the minority off the Greatest Page on any given subject or issue. I believe many times the minority can be on the right side of an issue or subject and most often serve as the leading edge to change. I also believe the un-recommending feature can only produce a negative dynamic which serves to dull that edge while also shrinking the "big tent" which shelters the numerous perspectives making up the Democratic Party in general and D.U. specifically.

Today this subject is hot because it's a new change and as such is discussed at length but should it remain in existence over time, I believe the consequences will only serve to erode the dynamism which makes D.U. what it is as bastion of free speech. We don't have a scarlet A to brand posts with, so let's just do it with an invisible U.

I proposed up thread to increase the number of recommendations required in order to make the Greatest Pages as a means to clean it up, this would seem to be a natural and logical consequence of D.U. having grown in population and a higher threshold would be justified in my opinion.

The Republicans believed in the Silent Majority, I just hate to see us go down that road.

[Ms. Toad]

56. Frankly - who cares?

I don't use a popularity contest (which is all the greatest page ever was) to determine what it is important for me to read. All the other voices are still there, as loud as ever, exactly where the author(s) put them. Nothing silent about them.

If a thread is active it is on the front page of whatever room the author puts it in, and remains so as long as anyone is interested in it. It just doesn't get replicated in the popularity contest room - which, unfortunately, puts the top 5 on the DU home page.

The way the unopposed rec has been used in the past as a way to grant the majority a tyranny to tell an unpopular minority voice to shut up. If you have been paying attention you must be aware of how many times there were "rec this if you think crybaby gays should stfu" type posts in the top five. I don't think that particular kind of voice should be showcased - yet that is exactly how the unopposed rec has been most frequently used - to give the majority an unopposed voice to shame/publicly denounce an unpopular minority. Allowing unrecommends at least gives the minority a chance to mitigate that public tonglashing, and drop it from the top five slots - if not altogether off the Greatest Page. (And, again, doing so doesn't silence the voice - that can only be done by people not responding - all balancing out the unopposed recs does is allow the removal of the public ugly from the DU showcase.)

[Uncle Joe]

57. Obviously you care, on the one hand you denigrate the Greatest Pages as just being a popularity

contest and in your last paragraph laud it as the showcase of D.U.

The majority have always had the power to oppose and denounce hateful bigoted threads and they have. Opposing threads to such nonsense have also made the Greatest Page. This was the spirit behind the idea of the First Amendment. This is why one patriot said he may not agree with you but he would defend to the death your right to say it.

While you may take comfort by racist or bigoted threads being eliminated from the Greatest Pages from the unrecommend feature, I see the baby being thrown out with the bath water.

I see the potential for abuse with the unrecommend feature and that sword will cut both ways.

Again I beleive increasing the number of recommendations required to make the Greatest Pages would serve the same purpose without the negative Karma dampening and alienating the minority position on solid and good but controversial subjects.

[Ms. Toad]

59. Showcase: The top five threads are placed

in the middle of the home page. I'm not lauding it - it's just the reality of how DU has decided to treat the top 5 threads from the Greatest Page. If it didn't treat them this way, I wouldn't know or care what was on the Greatest Pages.

Since those 5 threads are featured prominently, I am well aware that the unopposed rec feature was repeatedly abused and regularly resulted in concerted attacks on minority positions. Not wanting these ugly threads on the front page of DU has nothing to do with limiting free speech. Just because I think the KKK has the right to hold a parade - or even write an editorial for the paper - doesn't mean that I think it would be appropriate for the newspaper to decide the placement of the article (or editorial) using rules that only accept votes in favor of a particular article.

If the unopposed rec hadn't been abused, Skinner would not have found it necessary or appropriate to respond to the calls for the unrec feature. So far, it appears to be working. Even with only a day, the articles in the 5 front page slots are far more likely to be substantive than any time in recent memory.

[Uncle Joe]

68. That's not the only reality, your voice was weakened as well.

The same result could have been obtained by increasing the number of recommendations required to make the Greatest Page without taking the people's votes away, by giving 50.00001% of the members veto power over 49.99999% or less on any given subject, issue or candidate.

D.U.'s population of registered users has increased by over 50,000 just since I've joined, it's inevitable some people will abuse the power of recommendation but that's no good reason to punish everybody, you don't do surgery with a meat cleaver.

[Ms. Toad]

69. Increasing to what - 400+?

I have seen a number of threads that have no business being on the greatest page with between 200 and 400 votes. (Including a lot of threads in the nature of "rec my thread if you think the crybaby gays should STFU")

Unopposed recs have been regularly abused - in my opinion resulting in at least one of the top 5 threads on the Greatest page being used to slam minorities or some opinion they find annoying. Increasing the number of posts to get on the greatest page won't fix that, given how many recs those threads tend to have.

[Uncle Joe]

71. Taking away and hiding any minority's votes doesn't strengthen your cause.

They could increase the required votes and reflect both pro and cons votes on any given thread. They could require a specific margin between pro and con votes to make the Greatest Page.

As I mentioned before threads opposing and shooting down those threads you mentioned have garnered even more votes on the Greatest Page and no doubt served to educate some of the ignorant.

If threads make it to the Greatest Page based on homophobia, racism or any other ignorant, bigoted concept, they can be removed, but I believe hiding the minority's votes on any given thread and treating them as worth 0 or less than 0 flies in the face of democracy and distorts reality making reform all the more difficult.

[LoZoccolo]

73. I wanna see this "crybaby gays" thread that made it to the top.

Do you have a link to it? Do you remember when it was posted?

[PeaceNikki]

38. Whoa. That's deep.

[Ms. Toad]

40. You beat me to it. n/t

[OMC]

43. I notice the people who post bullshit 99% of the time are the ones bitching about this

[Uncle Joe]

47. And I was just about to welcome you to D.U but just so you and everyone else knows I do like

the new instantaneousness of the recommend button, no second clicking.

[mmonk]

48. I agree.

The poster may have to say they recommended the thread if they want it noticed.

[laylah]

50. Stupid question time..

wtf is this all about? I see all these posts about "unrec" but no explanation. Pardon my ignorance but what is this all about? :shrug:

[slackmaster]

51. Sometimes people deserve to be silenced

Like when they post nonsense like the OP in this thread.

K&UnR

:kick:

[CakeGrrl]

52. So what's the real goal here: Accessibility or Approval?

Case in point, I found your thread because it got kicked back to the top as people continue to comment on it.

I read it and may or may not disagree. There is a counter to record the fact that I read it.

But the crux of the issue seems to be that you can no longer see who "likes" the OP comment. Is that the important thing - that people need agreement with their viewpoint, whatever view that may be?

Is it not enough to know that the thread has received extensive exposure, or has prompted a large number of responses?

[Uncle Joe]

55. The dynamic of introducing any new controversial subject, idea or issue has been dampened.

The kicking of these threads regarding the subject of un-recommending is going through a spike because it's new, but the greater issue are threads on other subjects in which the majority can dampen the presentation of new ideas, controversial; subjects and or issues by un-recommending them over the wishes of the minority. They will never make the Greatest Pages even when the minority is on the right side of an issue or subject and leading the cutting edge of reform.

[JVS]

53. How come your threads are always

[uppityperson]

54. Recommending a post /is/ silencing someone. (try it this way)

It silences a person who unrecommended a post.

If I unrec a post and you rec, it will show up as zero and no one will know that someone thought it was bad enough to unrecommend.

[cboy4]

58. The unrecommend function is a God send for disruptors like you.

unrecommend. Click!

[Starry Messenger]

75. Seriously.

I was skeptical of the new feature at first, but this is very therapeutic.

[rustydog]

61. WOW this post has been recommended and un recommended

Yet it still exists on the DU board...Just not on the GREATEST page.

Whose ego is bruised? This is not stifling free speech or silencing anyone, I read your friggin' post and was able to comment on it.

Ergo, you were not silenced!
Bye bye for now, I have to get back to my life which is NOT posting on DU for fun or profit (as some try to do).

[LoZoccolo]

62. It does not sound like you read my post.

For one, it was not about silencing original posts.

[donheld]

63. Oh just stop. It does not!

It just means they disagree

[Cali_Democrat]

64. I'm not sure if I totally agree with that, but I think both the recs and unrecs should be displayed

nt

[Life Long Dem]

66. 9 hours later

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[blondeatlast]

72. If I vote for A and my neighbor votes for B--whoi was "silenced"?

The answer is: neither of us (at least not in a representative democracy)..

[LoZoccolo]

74. Neither - both of their votes are included in a final tally. n/t