Rec/Unrec works for non-donors?

[gardenista]

Am I imagining this? I was starless after being away for some time, and didn't even realize it until I tried to use the DU Groups forums. Have spent time happily recommending/unrecommending threads for a few hours before I discovered that...

I'm lucky because a generous DUer donated a star for me, which I promise to pay forward in January. (Ironic, eh, massive COBRA payment means no extras of any kind!)

Just wondering if requiring a star for using the REC/UNREC feature might be a good idea?

Mods- just lock 'er up if this is inappropriate, or if I have it wrong that non-donors can vote to rec/unrec, but I saw several other threads on this topic and no mention of this.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. everyone gets to vote.

[Bobbie Jo]

4. Should be..except for those who have multiple accounts

With 0 posts.

Who says you can't rec your own posts.....?

[gardenista]

7. Wow, I didn't know that either!

And I agree that multi account users with zero posts are not genuine participants in the conversation.

[Warren Stupidity]

11. multiple accounts are 'sock puppets' and are forbidden.

doesn't mean they do not happen, but unless you have evidence, this is not a real problem.

[gardenista]

13. I think sock puppets have been a big problem here

Been here a long time, and have seen many

[endless october]

2. i vote that everyone gets to vote either way.

and off topic, i'm a fellow COBRA-enrolled member. hang in there.

[gardenista]

3. You hang in there, too!

It's getting scary out here!

[dbonds]

5. I've given big donations in the past, but because I can't afford it now I can't vote?

[gardenista]

9. I don't know, that's why I'm asking the question.

It seems arbitrary that you can't use Groups, but you can rec/unrec, which seems to have a pretty big impact around here these days.

[parasim]

6. I've no star and I can Rec/Unrec. ?

I think that a requirement for rec/unrec'ing is a bad idea personally. But really who cares anyway? The rec unrec is a cliquey sort of function anyway.

[gardenista]

8. Yeah, try it!

I rarely used it either, but have been feeling a bit more passionate lately, after having been away for a while.

[parasim]

18. Actually, I do recommend posts a fair amount... haven't ever un-recced though.

[arcadian]

10. auto-unrec

[gardenista]

12. So you would like to auto unrec posters you don't like?

[arcadian]

14. No I auto-unrec posts that mention the rec function

like your's :P

[gardenista]

15. Thanks, I won't take it personally, then

;-)

[cherokeeprogressive]

17. That's how it works for a large portion of DU'ers.

I don't mind saying that my posts get unrecs in less time than it actually takes to read them...

I wear it like a badge of honor.

I remember an old Benneton clothing commercial that said: "When my parents hate my clothes, they're PERFECT." That's pretty much how I view R/U here... some posters thrive on recs, because they think themselves so important that their opinions SHOULD be on The Greatest Page, so that more people can see them.

Silly.

[cherokeeprogressive]

16. Normally, posts that mention rec and unrec get auto-unrecs from me, but since you said you've been

away, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and give you neither.

I have to agree with you though, that R/U should be the playground of those of us who actually contribute monetarily to this site.

[parasim]

19. Seriously? Only those with money can engage fully on this site?

nice...

[cherokeeprogressive]

20. I notice you have no star. That, to me, says that you think the internet shows up on your monitor

without ANYONE having to pay for it.

I wonder if you consider, or are capable of considering, what it takes to put a place like this out there where YOU, and I can access it and use it to make our opinions known.

Who pays for the bandwidth? Santa Claus? Who pays for the R & D it takes to make possible things like PM's, Journals, Searches, and Profiles available to EVERYBODY, WORLDWIDE, who wishes to make use of them?

Do you think this site shows up due to some magic that Al Gore envisioned when he invented the information superhighway?

[Egnever]

28. R&D?

They didnt come up with this stuff you know. Its a message board...Yes over the years they have tweaked it and made improvements but at its heart its still a mesage board. The bandwith is the only truely costly thing about this site and even that isnt that bad.

What makes this board a place worth visiting is its contributors, the posters. Without them this board would be nothing.

Not everyone has the cash to spare for a website and the guys running this place are doing just fine.

Your rant is rediculous.

[cherokeeprogressive]

21. Don't try to make ME feel guilty... Try doing a "Search" without contributing.

So, yes, only those "with money" (it takes as little as $5 dollars) engage "fully" on this site.

If you smoke, drink any kind of liquor, see movies in the theater, or go to museums or art exhibits where admission is charged, then you can afford to contribute to DU and "engage fully".

[gardenista]

25. Now I realize I could have bought my own star.

If it's only $5. Had no idea, I thought it was $50 per year.

[gardenista]

27. I'm sort of surprised that you have over 1,000 posts

and don't realize that you can't use all of the features without donating.

[gardenista]

23. I was fortunate because I was given a star soon after I returned

After many years of donating what and when I could, this month it's out of the question.

But I also had no expectation, when I didn't have a star, of being able to rec/unrec, and was really surprised to learn that I could do so.

[Egnever]

22. Yup I just used it.

[gardenista]

24. So why do you join a discussion board if you just want to

limit your discussion to "I like it", "I don't like it", with no interest in supporting your position? Truly curious.

[Egnever]

29. Am I limited to just that?

[gardenista]

32. You seem to be limiting yourself to just that. Is my point.

[Egnever]

33. Clearly you have been missing my lovely comentary

[gardenista]

37. But not your atrocious spelling

[Egnever]

38. We all have our faults

I've learned to live with mine.

[gardenista]

39. Indeed, I'm sure it is wrought of the passion of your convictions

which is a good quality.

Furthermore, those who accuse others of spelling should not live in glass abodes. Or is that adobes? Or both, I suppose one could live in both...

[SidDithers]

47. Would you prefer a discussion board where your only options are...

I like it
I abstain?

Seems to me that

I like it
I abstain
I don't like it

is a much more fair, dare I say democratic, system.

Sid

[Spider Jerusalem]

26. Might as well restrict POSTING to donors only, while you're at it

personally, I find the insane fits of pique that all the people who passionately loathe the unrec feature manage to work themselves into kind of amusing, as though the 'Greatest' page (which I do not, and have never, used) were the ultimate test of a subject's worthiness or lack thereof. On the contrary, I should imagine that the ratio of signal to noise on the 'Greatest' page has increased appreciably since the unrec feature was introduced (since before, it largely consisted of inane hit-and-run nonsense of not even a paragraph blatantly begging to make it to the 'Greatest' page...'Rec this thread if you agree that...', etc). And I don't see why, when all members can start threads, and reply to them, the rec/unrec feature should be limited merely to donors.

[gardenista]

31. My question is not motivated by some insane fit of pique...

Hope it's not perceived that way by you or anyone. I don't really have a strong opinion about the rec/unrec feature, but was pretty curious after having been away for some time about the homogenous tone the greatest page had taken. I wondered why, also noticed many new faces, and a complete shift in tone in GD and GD/P.

It didn't make sense to me that solid members who have been solid dems on this board for many years were getting their informative, useful posts unrecommended. When I discovered my no-star status, after having done several recs, and a few unrecs of threads, I was really surprised. The whole rec, and esp. unrec thing is pretty new to me, and I'm mainly curious.

There are levels of access to this site, and my question is why the rec/unrec falls below the threshold of donor status. That is all.

I do think you have some valid observations about the "greatest" page.

[TorchTheWitch]

30. poor people should be shut out?

That's acceptable to you? Especially for a feature that has such little importance? You do realize that all rec/unrec does is put an OP on or keep an OP off the Greatest Page? Why do you think poor people should not have the ability to use such an inconsequential feature?

[gardenista]

35. The site has levels of access.

No one said anything about "shutting out poor people".

Why should anyone be interested in an inconsequential feature? So why would it make a difference to you, if you are poor, as you say?

[TorchTheWitch]

40. what matters to me is your desire to shut out poor people

from using a feature that is of no consequence and therefore you shouldn't fucking care if they can use it or not. It's your desire to shut out poor people from using a feature that YOU deem as important enough to be exclusive. I don't happen to like donor access only features since it shuts out poor people. I particularly don't like anyone wanting to not only shut out poor people but from a feature that is of no consequence anyway since it smacks of shutting out poor people just because they want to shut out poor people.

I couldn't care less if we had the rec/unrec feature or not, and I've said many times that we should probably get rid of the Greatest Page since the whole rec/unrec feature is used primarily as it was not intended and causes an absurd amount of strife and attention. I DO care about poor people being shut out especially from a feature with less importance than Alert, Hide, Ignore which non-donors ARE permitted to use.

1) Why do you think rec/unrec is so important as to be a donor exclusive feature?
2) Why do you want to shut out poor people from using an inconsequential feature when they are allowed to use far more important ones?
3) Why do YOU have the desire to shut out poor people at all?

[gardenista]

45. Yep, shutting out poor people is my favorite activity

Right after crunching on the bones of trust fund anarchists.

[omega minimo]

34. HEY ALL Y'ALL IT'S NOT A FUKKIN VOTE!!!!!!

:freak:

[gardenista]

36. good point!

[lamp_shade]

41. Kick and Big Rec.

[gardenista]

44. Thanks!

[TexasObserver]

42. Unrecommend - another thread attacking those who use "Unrecommend."

Why don't you ignore Unrec v. Recommend, if it bothers you so much? You complain about the feature to those who tell you they use it, and you attack the same posters for using it.

It's clear that you are simply using the donation star as another reason to whine about the unrec feature. All your crying about it won't make the admins remove the feature. Unlike you, they're rational about the feature, and understand that it keeps crappy threads off the Greatest page.

[gardenista]

43. Hmmm... I don't think I've complained or attacked.

I guess you are still battling some vestige of another discussion?

[TexasObserver]

46. You have. In this thread. That's what I based my comment upon.