Do You Want to See Total #s of Recs AND Unrecs?

[Common Sense Party]

Everyone else has a poll or thread about this. I might as well start one, too.

I think seeing the # of Unrecs a thread gets would be helpful.

Sort of like rubbernecking at a car accident, I might be more inclined to look at some threads with a high Unrec number (depending on my mood at the time).

What do you think?

[Iggo]

1. Nope.

K&U.

[Common Sense Party]

17. And why not, pray tell? n/t

[Iggo]

21. It seems to me it'll open up a new round...

...of something else to complain about.

[Common Sense Party]

22. We're ALWAYS going to complain about SOMETHING.

If it's not this, it's something else. So why not have this?

[Iggo]

25. I just told you.

:hi:

[donheld]

53. Any day ending in a y opens up a new round...

...of something else to complain about.

[Iggo]

57. Ya got that right.

[zipplewrath]

2. Least recommended

I presume what you mean is a "least" page of some sort, some where to go and see those threads most unpopular.

[Common Sense Party]

4. No, that's not what I mean, although the Admins could create one

if they want.

I mean, when I look at a thread, I want to be able to see the total # of Recs, AND the total number of Unrecs for that thread.

Simple.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Telling people that a thread has a different number of net recs than it actually has is bizarre...

I'm not a huge fan of <0, but deliberately telling people the *wrong* number is just weird.

Show both numbers - correctly - I say.

[Common Sense Party]

5. Agreed.

[Better Believe It]

20. A thread could have 40 recommends but only show 20 because 20 unrecommended!

That is bizarre and misleading.

I think we may disagree on many things but on this we are in agreement.

[BlooInBloo]

26. Not quite - you're mish-mashing raw recs and net recs...

Note that my preferred situation how have both numbers available (by easy calculation).

[Better Believe It]

31. I never was very good at math.

OK

Let's see if I understand this.

Let say 40 DU'ers recommend a post.

Under the old way that's 40 recommends. Period Right so far?

Now let's say with the new system 20 DU'ers unrecommend that post.

That would leave a balance showing of 20 recommends. Right?

+40 REC
-20 UNREC
= +20 REC

[BlooInBloo]

34. Close enough for us to communicate successfully. Here's the issue I was getting at...

10 recs
20 unrecs

net score: -10



The way things are right this second, that would be displayed as <0

Skinner is proposing that it be displayed as 0

I prefer that it be displayed as -10



My objection to the way things are right this second: Why give people less information than you have to?

My objection to Skinner's proposal: It's bad giving people less information, but giving people WRONG information is bizarre

My objection to my proposal: None, it's obviously the best possible idea, because I had it.

[Common Sense Party]

35. Oh, Lord, it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in ev'ry way!

:)

[BlooInBloo]

36. Well it only stands to reason that I like no proposals better than my own...

Because if I find one I do like better, I steal it and make it mine. :P

[Common Sense Party]

37. It's the American way.

Or the Chinese way, perhaps. Everything's made in China these days.

[pscot]

6. You shouldn't have. Really!

Because now I'm going to have to have you killed.

[Bicoastal]

7. FWIW, I already have a poll up on this.

[Common Sense Party]

9. Sorry, didn't see yours.

How's the vote going on your poll?

[Common Sense Party]

10. No, I did see yours, and it's not asking what I'm asking.

That's why I did this poll.

If this is your poll to which you refer: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6066232

[redqueen]

11. Your poll didn't have this option available...

I ended up voting "other" on your poll.

[Sebastian Doyle]

8. I want their IP addresses listed.

I suspect a lot of these threads have a cluster of unrecs coming from the same building.

[el_bryanto]

12. The man trying to keep the truth out?

Yeah, I guess it'd be interesting to find out.

Bryant

[Uncle Joe]

13. Fasicnating the poll is 2 to 1 favor and the thread is rated 0 or

:shrug:

[Common Sense Party]

14. I know. Ironic. I never expected this to land on the Greatest Page.

But I know most people want to see the # of Unrecs.

[Junkdrawer]

15. Yes. It's disconcerting in a Diebold kind of way to rec a thread...

and still see "<0".

[Common Sense Party]

16. Maybe we should demand: PAPER BALLOTS FOR RECS AND UNRECS!!!

[Junkdrawer]

18. Say what you want about the old system, but it was transparent...

and almost impossible to rig. The most that could be done was to artificially inflate the recs of a thread.

[BlooInBloo]

19. Yep. Seeing the numbers would eliminate every "I un/rec'd and it didn't change" post.

[Buns_of_Fire]

23. I'd like to see the numbers, if nothing than just out of curiosity.

But then, I could probably give you reasons not to, as well as reasons to.

I'm still campaigning for the :thumbsdown: button that'll send 20,000 volts back through the intertubes into an offending person's computer.:evilgrin:

[Common Sense Party]

24. Why do you want to electrocute me?

[Buns_of_Fire]

27. Heavens, not YOU!

And the way I have this figured, it wouldn't leap from the CPU to the keyboard or anything (well, maybe just a tingle). Even at that, the effects of the :thumbsdown: button could be negated by the use of the simple in-line "Zap-Me-Not" filter from Buns International, Inc. (available at all better electronic stores, only $29.95, or thru this exclusive infomercial for $19.95 or two for $40.00, but we can't do this all day, so act now).

[Common Sense Party]

29. In a screaming, Billy Maysesque voice, I hope?

Or Vince from Sham Wow?

[PurityOfEssence]

28. Unrec is the junior-high peer-pressure equivalent of a sitcom laugh track

DON'T listen to this; we all agree it's not what we all agree should be heard.

Being told what is acceptable is not going to help anything except the need for insecure people to be deluded into thinking that they're dominant. Perhaps my tolerance for annoyance is a bit higher, but I don't come here as a refuge from the vicissitudes of an irritating world; I come here for the interplay of different opinions stemming from a non-reactionary worldview. I can somehow tolerate the "Obama can do no wrong, ever, period" people, and I'd like to think that toleration can be had for those who don't subscribe to this lockstep approach, ESPECIALLY when the contrary arguments come from the LEFT.

There are plenty of ways to secure one's comfort zone without stomping on irritating dissent; the best way is to simply not read too much of it. Use "ignore" if necessary; that only really messes up one's own perspective, not the whole community's.

Blah.

[Common Sense Party]

30. Rec is often the junior-high equivalent of the 'cool crowd.'

On a DEMOCRATIC forum, I should be able to vote if I think a thread is good, or if a thread is crap.

[chill_wind]

42. Then there's only one thing to do.

Eliminate them both and take away the distractions and the score-keeping.

[Common Sense Party]

50. Skinner has said Unrec is here to stay.

And you don't really expect Recommend to be removed after so many years, do you?

No, I think there's only one thing to do:

Get used to it.

[TahitiNut]

46. Virtually every critique I've read about "unrecommend" (and those who use it) is clear projection.

... and yours seems to be no exception. :shrug:

[fishwax]

32. No, not really

I'm fine with the system as it is.

[ShamelessHussy]

33. Yes. I think the more information we have the more we can understand

Especially on a forum.

I would also like the ability to rate every comment and then filter by the rating which would help the experience with the very long threads.

can someone start a poll on that question, too?

[Better Believe It]

38. K & R

[RoyGBiv]

39. I'm going with the Get a Life option ...

This is one of the more bizarre things I've seen happen here.

[chill_wind]

40. Yes, if the argument that brought all this about was based in part

that there was some sort of "artificial consensus" in having only a rec option (vs both)then there is still something rather artificial or less than transparent with this-- about the true actual degree of opinion differential.

Doesn't KOS have this as a successful example that it can be done?

[Laelth]

41. Excellent poll.

The third option expresses the opinion of many. While I abhor that option, and feel that those who have that opinion lack empathy and any real concern for DU, its presence on the poll as an option gives real credibility to the data you are accumulating.

Well done.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Common Sense Party]

43. Thank you.

I have to admit, the preponderance of threads about this feature makes me feel that way at times, but I voted for having a count.

[Laelth]

44. Smile. I understand that feeling.

Expressing it rudely to those of us who care, however, has caused me a good deal of angst. And I am not accusing you of doing that, either here or elsewhere, but I have been told (too many times now) that I need to get a life. I usually ask those kinds of snarkmasters exactly who made them the Supreme Judge of what I ought to care about? I then ask whether they have a life outside of attacking those of us who care about DU enough to discuss, in good faith, how it might work best. They generally dislike that response.

Nevertheless, because that attitude is so prevalent, it's important that you allowed it to be expressed in your poll.

Thanks.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Canuckistanian]

45. I think for the first few hours we COULD see how many "unrecs" there were

When the unrec feature first appeared there was an "XX/XX" number beside each OP. The first number was the "positive" recs and the second was the "total" recs.

I'd like to see that come back.

[Common Sense Party]

48. I must not have seen that. I don't remember both scores. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

51. Yup.

[McCamy Taylor]

47. Knowledge is power. The more we know, the better.

Plus, we can pass the popcorn while we watch the flame wars.

I want to be able to write things that get people thinking, and the best way to do that sometimes is to write something that elicits a negative reaction. If we total the number of unrecommends then I will know what issues people are working on here (like do they automatically give a negative to anything positive about immigrants, do gay threads get rated down). This could be an invaluable tool to judge the thinking of the DU community. Unfortunately, it will also advertise our prejudices to lurkers. However, if we have opinions we should not be ashamed of them.

[Common Sense Party]

49. Exactly. Say it loud, say it proud. n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

52. I agree completely

Lets put it all out there. We need transparency and openness :D

[lpbk2713]

54. I'd say the 'ayes' have it.

... for whatever good that might do. :eyes:

[Common Sense Party]

55. The "yes" votes have hovered right around 70% all day.

The "no" votes never got above 6%.

I'd say that's pretty conclusive, at least of those who saw and voted.

I just don't know if the Admins will take this suggestion under advisement.

[chill_wind]

56. I took them to be receptive to lots of possible tweaks in their last statements.

"Many of you have suggested that we could crunch the recs and unrecs in new ways in order to create lists of highly controversial threads, or popular threads, or threads with the most positive recommendations, or whatever. We think it would be cool to do this. If we can provide you with more different ways to experience DU, that's a good thing.

If they find one like this possible/feasible, this poll helps provide a nice sample reinforcement for it. Thanks for structuring it.

[Martin Eden]

58. YES, it would help us understand the impact of the UN-recommend tool

The un-recommend tool is controversial. I've heard resonable arguments both FOR and AGAINST. I've been in the FOR camp because I think it is a valuable tool IF the DU community uses it in a responsible manner. However, unless I can see which threads are getting un-recommended, I have very little information on how the tool is being used.

[BlooInBloo]

60. Voter confidence = transparency.

Where have I heard that before?

[Better Believe It]

59. K & R

Yes.

[mdmc]

61. 1

1