A Suggestion For Finessing UnReckers

[omega minimo]

If those who would rather undo someone else's positive endorsement of a thread,
rather than simply ignore,
rather than not post and let it fall,
rather than contribrute relevant comments to open discussion,
consider this tweak of the coding and consider the effects:


The instant gratification of the :nuke: UnRec button will also KICK the thread,

Those who want to deny prominent availability of the thread to others on the Greatest Page will have their say.

Those who positively endorsed the thread have not been completely negated.

The thread is given another breath of life.

The decision to :nuke: a Recommendation is tempered by the decision to :kick: it.

The UnWreckers have even more power and a lowered impetus to abuse the privilege.

[BlooInBloo]

1. As long as you're on the nuking hyperbole, why not go whole-hog, and call it thread GENOCIDE?

[omega minimo]

2. Ya think?

:popcorn:

[MineralMan]

3. Well, since none of us can effect the changes you suggest,

would not your proposal be better presented in an email to Skinner? The Admins of the site are the only ones who can do anything regarding forum policy.

I'm not sure what the point is of posting this is. Admins might see it, or they might not.

[zeemike]

4. An interesting idea...

Which will be <0 because the majority are not about to negotiate it...If it pisses people off no problem as long as it is less than the majority....it has become about winning.

[omega minimo]

5. Winning?

Is that what they call it. :wow:

[angrycarpenter]

6. You are thinking about it too much.

Adapt to change, don't fear it. I was a little taken aback by the system but I doubt it will change my posting habits, or anything I may say. It's nice to make it to the greatest page but it is nowhere near the reason I might post an OP. I'm not looking for glory or even approval, just a few ears. Every time I say something it is with the full expectation they someone may feel I am full of it.

Sure the trolls will use the system to disrupt in a small insignifigant way but I suspect that a member who does nothing but go from OP to OP handing out unrecs willy-nilly may find himself quietly tombstoned. This will be my only comment on this rather insignifigant subject.

[omega minimo]

8. You're not thinking about it all. Thank you for the generic comment.

[angrycarpenter]

10. At least I didn't push the unrec button on you.

I have no plans to make frequent use of it. Who am I to judge? You are right I am giving it little thought, They have the right to manage this board anyway they want and any of us has the right to vote with our feet of we don't like it.

[omega minimo]

14. Good points. Thanks again.

[lumberjack_jeff]

7. It seems the bare minimum.

If a person takes issue with a post, but doesn't have the courage to comment on it, the result of pushing the "you suck" button should be a kick.

[itsrobert]

9. < 0

:puke:

[omega minimo]

15. Thank you for volunteering. Good bye.

[PassingFair]

11. I was never in the habit of "recking" threads.

If I agreed with somebody, I posted in the
thread.

Now, I have to make sure to "rec" interesting
threads.

[omega minimo]

16. I think a lot of good folks are not going to bother doing either. Making it a contest with no tally

is like pissing up a rope.

[IDemo]

12. Another idea

I think that the total number of rec/unrecs should both count towards getting a post onto the Greatest page. Unrec'ers might be less apt to do so if they
knew it would only boost a posts chances of making the "Greatest".

If it is only going to be used in the spirit of an online auction bid-sniping tool, then I agree with those who feel it's just a bad idea.

[truedelphi]

13. I have the feeling that for some of us

Whose popularity is low due to complaining about how the Party has left us (now that we have served the November uses_, the UnRec U system is indeed like an online auction bid-sniping tool.

If that were the only thing troublesome about life in this modern Universe, I would be one happy camper, regardless of my thin skin!

[omega minimo]

17. Yeah that just takes to long to say, "an online auction bid-sniping tool." How about

"MEBay"? :evilgrin:

[omega minimo]

Suggesting that the Greatest page

would be "Most controversial"?


I don't know -- in trying to fathom what problem this is fixing, some folks are talking as if they're bothered that certain posts "make it look like the majority of DU feels that way"?

Huh? Who thinks that? Do people think that themselves or they're worried someone ELSE thinks that?

:shrug:

[IDemo]

22. Sure, most controversial, or simply most worthy of genuine debate

If I wanted only to see threads where everybody was in agreement, I'd hang out at FR or RaptureReady®. OK, no I wouldn't. :)

Whatever happened to "Let it Sink", hide-thread, or simply ignoring OP's that don't meet one's needs? The virtual tug-of-war created by the rec/unrec thing seems a tad bit childish, IMO.

[Beam Me Up]

53. I agree but it is more than just "childish". It reinforces majority prejudice.

That, to me, isn't "progressive" but "regressive".

[omega minimo]

57. "Regressive"

it also reinforces the notion that people know who and what "the majority" is and thinks. That's wack.

[Political Heretic]

18. I think the unrec feature is silly and really embarassing for DU, but I'll live with it.

I've never cared whether my threads get to a special page or not. In fact, in some cases, massive unrec fests almost make me feel like I'm doing something right. There are some "prevailing truths" at DU than I think should be challenged.

But as far as a greatest page goes, maybe it makes sense that what's there reflects what the bulk of the community has decided most reflects them.

I suppose that's ok, though its going to be funny to see how flaccid and establishment DU starts to look at this feature takes hold.

[omega minimo]

19. OK one of the more thoughtful and reason-able posts on this matter.

:thumbsup:

[WillyT]

21. Wait Til Obama And The Dems In Congress Do Something Really Stupid...

Let's say... cave on the public option for health care.

DU will be a massive Rec\Unrec\apalooza!!!

We'll have to truck in melted butter for all the popcorn smilies that will pop up.

:evilgrin:

[omega minimo]

26. If this is truly a Clinton Admin Redux

Dems will find a way to go along to get along, both in DC and elsewhere. Which will lead to another Right Wing nightmare.

Do you know what the actual offending topics were that caused this solution-looking-for-a-problem?

[WillyT]

33. Haven't A Clue Really, But...

curiously the new tool was added right after the Michael Jackson DUfest (multiple positive and negative threads made it to TGP).

If that wasn't it, it was certainly interesting timing.

:shrug:

[omega minimo]

34. Maybe Rush Limbaugh strongarmed about the Armed Forces MegaRecced thread

or maybe Mydamn Speaker.

[truedelphi]

35. Perhaps it will be very homogenized here

To the point that in addition to being the home of the Unrec, it will become "Undemocraticunderground."

[fishwax]

20. I don't think an unrec actually does kick the thread

Perhaps it should. That might be interesting.

[omega minimo]

27. That's my suggestion. It would be a more deliberate act and let Recced threads breathe

a bit rather than fall too fast due to hair trigger vandalism :thumbsup:

[PretzelWarrior]

23. this whole development has really wounded you, hasn't it?

I've never seen someon flog an issue like this as hard as you. You are beating your old nag around the final stretch in a losing cause. We can see with our own eyes. You're essentially asking us to ignore what we see and believe your words. BAHAHHAHAHHAHHHAHAH!

you crack me up, dude.

[omega minimo]

28. That's a full load of dishonest horseshit and after YOUR antics regarding this, totally hypocritical

:evilfrown: Good bye.

[beam me up scottie]

29. IIRCC, this poster wanted to be able to block posters from posting in her threads.

But allowing other members to un-rec her threads is giving them too much power. :eyes:

[omega minimo]

32. Speaking of stalkers, that has nothing to do with this thread. And misrepresents AS USUAL

:evilfrown:

If this was about blocking, if Ignore is the reluctantly utilized final resort to venal, obnoxious, rule breaking, occasionally insane serially detractors, there's no reason to have ANYTHING to do with them.

[Obamanaut]

24. On the plus side, this controversy has nicely replaced the multiple

celebrity death and amateur contest winner threads.

edited to put the d on replaced in subject line.

[canetoad]

25. Yup. It's 'Community Building'.

[omega minimo]

30. It's Groupthink Building

These people running around here thinking there is a monolithic consensus of "most everyone on DU" and THEY know what it is and what it ISN'T are scary. And delusional.

The irony being that those who are being marginalized here are openminded enough to not want an echo chamber, to want to know what those of way different worldviews think about common issues.........

:thumbsdown:

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PretzelWarrior]

39. YOU CAN, lady! sorry for calling you a dude if you aren't

I'm a bit confused about your gender/identity now based on how someone else replied to you. Be that as it may, I still laugh at this whole thing.

I am still able to click on your posts and read them. I can read posts of someone that theoretically has 550 unrec's and only 25 recs. If it is a hot topic it might have 50 replies or more.

What are you afraid of? That people will only read posts on the Greatest page from now on?

If that's your fear, you don't know DU very well. We are completely unmanageable.

[canetoad]

40. I abhor bloodsports, but watching

Americans interact peacefully sates my baser instincts for bloodless violence.

We tend to be a bit more laconic in Oz, less obsessed with talking about rights, more about just getting on and accepting that we have them.

Of course, I could never say that on DU, because then I would be a nazi.

:toast:

[omega minimo]

49. What a great and sensible way to live.

(I almost added fucker, fucker) :spray:

Part of the conflict in our Land of Oz Down The Rabbit Hole is b/w others and those aware about our rights that we do not curretnly have.... (and I don't mean reaching the Greatest page! :rofl: )

[HughMoran]

67. "These people" "monolithic concensus" "delusional" "irony" "marginalized"

You wouldn't know irony if it hit you on the back of the head.

[omega minimo]

72. You must have quite an agenda

to have misread that so completely.

[Javaman]

31. oh lord, here we go again...

:popcorn:

[masuki bance]

36. kick and unrec'd. nt

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

43. uh, I've used the unrec button twice since it was instituted, and I wish

all the hysterical and pitiful OPs about it would stop. and the nastiest, most vile crap (as well as the whiniest) is coming from people like you and the OP.

Lame doesn't begin to sum it up.

And yeah, I prefer to tell people my opinion straight out rather than registering it anonymously via the unrec button.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

47. I read through many threads looking for the need and rationale behind it.

Before the belligerence of the endorsements became overwhelming......

I've seen maybe three posts that had something solid in favor of it -- and reread the announcement, not sure what problem this is a solution to.

[Moochy]

52. ...

Yes, some more clarity on the supposed need for this feature would help, but I'm not holding my breath, having read the vaguely worded introduction announcement.

[omega minimo]

56. So be it

:hi:

[cali]

42. good grief. what is this the 20th OP you've started on this subject?

Pitiful.

[HughMoran]

51. ...or

pathetic?

[LWolf]

46. Good idea. nt

[omega minimo]

48. I appreciate that, LWolf.

:toast:

[LWolf]

58. The obvious problem with "unrec"

is that it is a tool to keep dissent from the greatest.

If we have to have it, if it has to stay, your idea takes away the impulse to "unrec" every opinion and idea differing from the mainstream, and allows more diversity onto the "greatest."

I use "greatest" as a tool. I don't often have time to sit at the 'puter for hours. And when I am, it's only because I'm avoiding other responsibilities. Procrastinating. The "greatest" allows me to quickly find some of the most important topics of the day without scrolling through the rest. If I only have 15 or 20 minutes, I don't miss most of the best.

Except for education topics, which are rarely "hot" enough to get much attention, lol.

I'd like "unrec" to go away. It seems like a tool to force the minority further to the fringes, and keep the mainstream on the front page. If we can't have it go away, an automatic kick would encourage more responsible use. I've always wished a "rec" could get an automatic kick anyway; it would cut down on all those "k&R" posts that add to post count but say nothing.

[HughMoran]

50. I am rather tickled at some of the posts on this topic

They seem to emanate from many of those who have wanted in the past to steer the conversation here into a direction of their choosing through the sheer boldness (and harshness) of their rhetoric. What I don't understand is, what are you afraid of? Can't your ideas hold up to criticism? If you piss off a bunch of people who used to just try to look the other way instead of jumping into a flame war (whilst grimacing), is it any wonder that they would feel like they now have a real "vote" as to what is truly great and what is more "ditto head" grist for an unproductive mill?

[omega minimo]

59. As I said, this has brought out an immediate flood of belligerent passive/aggressives pleased with

their pushbutton.

I am not going to address your bait or false accusations. If you are interested in what I think about this, you can read my posts.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

54. .

[omega minimo]

61. .

[annabanana]

55. Not a bad idea... At the very least, it will show once & for all how the

majority of DUers feel about it.. many more having gotten a chance to "eyeball" it...

[omega minimo]

60. At the least, it will make people think about use and prevent some misuse.

[woo me with science]

62. I have an idea. Only Indigo Children can rec and unrec.

That way we can be sure that threads are evaluated only by the gifted. O8)

[omega minimo]

64. I've got a button

that turns assholes into ghosts.

[woo me with science]

70. Now please, OM.

It was said with affection. :)

[woo me with science]

69. Oops, wrong place.

See, I'm not Indigo!

[JTFrog]

63. Let it sink!

:rofl:

[SidDithers]

65. Unreccing...

'cause there's nothing wrong with the unrec function as it is. It doesn't need finessing.

And your obsession with a non-existent problem is wildly humourous.

Sid

[Laelth]

66. You got a rec from me.

:dem:

-Laelth

[omega minimo]

71. Thank you

The black hole of Recs thanks you, too. :hi:

[Obamanaut]

68. Kick to keep this active, ma'am. nt