I thought the "unrec" feature was a contributing factor to incivility here

[Generic Other]

I for one am glad it is getting tombstoned. I have never posted my thoughts on this issue before, so I am not someone anyone should label a constant whiner--whatever.

I confess to having used it. Still, I find "unrec" meanspirited and cowardly. I think if you don't like what I have to say, you should yell at me. I can take it. We'll debate. This is a message board. That's what it's all about. I might even come to agree with you. I am here to be educated as a citizen and to develop my social consciousness. Don't lurk in the shadows and shoot poison darts at me. Engage me directly.

I have learned to be so much more articulate because of my ten years at DU. I have met really cool people, funny people, gifted people, wise people, and a only a very few I'd not want to call my friend. Lifelong learning. I have learned more about the big picture, how everything relates to it. I have had my thinking challenged. I have engaged in lively debate. Been informed. Said stupid things. Sounded wise a time or two. Reached out to others which I normally don't do as I am a reclusive person by nature. I am shy around people. No one would call me shy on DU. I am sure other much more accurate adjectives would come to mind. Because the Bush years made me strong in some ways. Unafraid of shouting for one thing. Angry at the way government operates. My vote means more to me than it did in the past. I am more thoughtful. Politically more committed to the left. Committed to activism and to supporting those who take action to protest social injustices.

"unrec"ing posts doesn't really help me do any of the things I come to DU for.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

1. It's a license to act like a coward.

Think of it on a Tom Ridge color-coded scale.

Worst is "unrec" because you can act like a damned grade schooler and "vote down" the kids you don't like in class with total anonymity.

Next worse is "attacking the poster and not the post." Still an act of cowardice, especially when people use thinly-veiled references to someone else to fly under the radar of DU's rules.

"Ideal" is adults having a civil conversation, AS ADULTS, even if the rhetoric is full of fire. That's gonna happen, especially on a Website that's primarily devoted to politics.

I hadn't heard anything about "unrec" going away but my three-word response is about frigging time.

:patriot:

[OhioChick]

10. Well said and agreed. n/t

[Mudoria]

15. And the rec feature should be pulled at the same time

I see no point in it being there either.

[Generic Other]

19. Except important news needs to be kicked up to be seen

Sometimes it's not the news of the day that gets lost but some thread about a need for outreach or a death in the DU family. These need to be bumped up so they aren't missed.

[Obamanaut]

115. A simple kick will move the post up, doesn't need a rec OR unrec to do that. nt

[SidDithers]

65. Agreed 100%...

Hopefully, DU3.0 will do away with The Greatest Page altogether. If posts need to be ranked, let it be by Most Views and Most Replies.

Sid

[Renew Deal]

78. I think rec highlights to most interesting content on DU.

It's not always the most popular, but that balances out on the greatest page. The most popular stuff has more recs. The problem is that on a political site it's difficult to get agreement on some topics, but most opinions are worthwhile and should be highlighted.

[City Lights]

143. Agreed. nt

[Cant trust em]

24. I unrec, but I don't do it anonymously.

I always go and post that I unrec'd it and why. I think it has some purpose if we're going to have a greatest page that somehow tells everyone what is really valuable and they should be reading.

[Kurovski]

159. Unrecc' for shark picture!

:-)

[Safetykitten]

231. Nice.

[Brilliantrocket]

2. Unrecced

[Generic Other]

5. I wonder what I said that so upset you?

I guess I should welcome you to DU.

[Brilliantrocket]

7. Unreccing is like a balance for which threads are good

Allows equal input from those who don't like a thread. I'd rather have it stay. Thanks for the welcome.

[SoCalDem]

23. "...which threads are good..."

:rofl:

[Brilliantrocket]

49. All the annoying Keith threads

It's like god shut up already. 1 thread is enough. Unreccs should be able to go negative and move threads to the shittiest threads section.

[emilyg]

112. Agree. Welcome.

[onehandle]

3. Unreccing keeps the imbedded trolls divisive crap off the front page.

Curious to see how DU deals with it without many extra eyes watching for it.

[Generic Other]

6. Mods do it just as well

They always take down the dumbest stuff I say. And probably doing me a favor when they do.

[SoCalDem]

26. Admin & mods have ALWAYS been able to "weed the garden"

allowing mean-spirited grudge-holders a secret assassin button is not helpful.

Discussion drives a discussion-board..not a plethora of K&R /"unrec" replies.

"Views" is a great idea, since people know that what they wrote at least was read..(or clicked on).

rec-unrec is so junior high..and not in sync with a place like DU (or what DU used to be)

Trolls? find em..boot em
argumentative, perennial troublemakers?..boot em

don't arm them with invisible weapons to shut down discussion & create divisiveness.

don't "like" a thread? ..don't post in it or click it..or state your reasons & let the discussion continue..with or without your input.

[Generic Other]

31. The voice of sanity and reason!

Thanks for explaining why many of us are glad DU is dumping that social experiment!

[immoderate]

35. Agree! I never unrecced anything.

--imm

[muriel_volestrangler]

101. "argumentative, perennial troublemakers" don't use unrec, do they? Think about it

The point of unrec is to allow us to rate a thread without having to kick it by replying to say "your facts/logic/opinion are poor". Because the kick gives an undeserving thread more exposure. Unrec means poor threads can disappear.

Those who are argumentative are keeping the thread alive with the argument. If 'rec' is taken away along with 'unrec' (and it would need to be, or the Greatest Page will become a measure of the size of DU factions, rather than of quality of an OP), then arguing will become the main way of making a thread visible. You'll see controversial threads, whether or not the arguments are interesting, because "argumentative, perennial troublemakers" start or continue them. Volume will replace content.

If you don't care what DU looks like to people who aren't yet members, of course, and your only concern is for how you personally notice threads, then this argument may not matter much to you. But if you want to attract new people who appreciate meaningful discussion, that the quality control that rec/unrec gives is a Very Good Thing.

Finally: 'Admin & mods have ALWAYS been able to "weed the garden"'. Yes, and damn tedious it is, to have to field alerts saying "this thread is rubbish, the OP has got it all wrong, please remove this from the front page, it makes DU look stupid/wrong/lying". Unrec means the far wider DU community can do that without putting yet more responsibility onto the mod shoulders, and do it more objectively, too. It makes it a referendum rather than an executive order.

[SoCalDem]

147. Having beem here since 2001, and also a Mod several times, I am fully "aware"

of the various ramifications. Thanks for your concern:hi:

[onehandle]

50. I have been told by Skinner himself that they depend on us to keep crap off front page.

With our votes and alerts.

[Generic Other]

53. Well here's what he said on "Ask Admin" page

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=437x1733

And I applaud him for doing so.

[Renew Deal]

69. I'm glad to hear it.

I think the rec/greatest page system works well without unrec. I also think it gives a more accurate view of how people on DU feel. Some unpopular opinions deserve to be on the greatest page.

[onehandle]

84. I know that. As I said upstream, I'll be curious to see what security replaces it. nt

[Renew Deal]

67. You don't need unrec to do that, unless you mean everyone that disagrees with you is a troll.

Which is probably what a lot of people think.

[onehandle]

90. 'imbedded trolls' is what I said.

And I clearly do not think that.

[Better Believe It]

106. That's smacks of censorship and anyone you disagree with is not a troll!

[onehandle]

123. See #90. nt

[Upton]

4. Unrec..

[Generic Other]

8. This is silly...I can kick my post for the next 40 days and nights if I like

your "unrec" reflects on you. I am talking about something else.

[Iggo]

29. And that's the whole point.

Unrec does nothing except keep a thread off of the greatest page. That's it.

[Generic Other]

33. No it also voices disapproval of the OP

A slap in the face from the shadows usually delivered with a certain degree of smugness. Passive aggressive enabling feature.

[Vinnie From Indy]

57. How would one know the "smugness" factor if the slap comes from the shadows?

Would that not mean the demeanor is concealed from the one receiving said slap?

[Generic Other]

63. True one only feels the invisible wind on one's cheek

but others are more honorable--they tell you they disapprove of your post and will unrec. A bit like slapping someone with a dueling glove, init?

[Iggo]

71. You're imagining a whole bunch of stuff in them shadows, ain't ya.

[Generic Other]

108. I have a good sense of smell I guess

:hi:

[Iggo]

135. Well, take a whiff of jiff, and answer me this:

I unrecced your thread.

Was it to slap you in the face?

Or was it to keep threads like this off of the greatest page?

[CTyankee]

161. that's not very nice, Iggo...I think she made some very good points myself.

[SidDithers]

9. Unrec...nt

Sid

[Generic Other]

13. Use it before you lose it

I am sure you are going to suffer withdrawal symptoms, Sid. I wonder if there's a DU detox center anywhere?

Not being snarky, just a smartass!
:P

[Flubadubya]

70. Don't worry about Sid...

I'm sure we will still see plenty of this even though the unrec function is gone:

Urec...nt
Sid

Old habits are not easily broken. :evilgrin:

[Mimosa]

11. When's this going to happen?

There is a certain contingent which un-recs more than others. They're like a co-ordinated machine.

edited for sp.

[Generic Other]

14. Skinner said so in Ask Admins and it's not in DU3

And not missed.

[applegrove]

228. Good. Too many GOP trolls were unrecing stuff that should have been

universally accepted by the DU. Great move skinner.

[BlueIris]

12. My guess is that it's being yanked because it is fueling too many flamewars.

And because it's attracting the professional trolls. Those getting paid per how many trollish things they post or unrec. If there's no unrec and they can't post, (for whatever reason) there's one less motivation to harrass DU.

[Generic Other]

16. How do you get a job as a professional troll?

And what is your official title? I can't see myself being introduced at cocktail parties as "Oh this is my friend. She's a professional troll."

[pipi_k]

34. Actually the statement that

it was attracting "professional trolls" is not correct. As I recall, a few months ago when we all voted on different things, I think it was Skinner who said that it was NOT "professional trolls" who had been using the unrec function the most.

At least, not the "army" some here were imagining.

[notadmblnd]

17. personally, I never used it

I think people should be able to say what they want to say- short of making violent threats. I've always worn my big girl panties here and dealt with the meanness of some people because I refuse to let some anonymous voice on a forum shut me up. The unrec feature accomplished that more than anything anyone could say to me.

[Reader Rabbit]

18. I agree; ironically, this threads has too many unrecs to allow my rec to count.

I know that for many, the unrec feature generated a great deal of worry that the site had become infested with professional saboteurs, who coordinated their efforts. Whether that belief is true or mere paranoia is irrelevant. It caused DUers to view their fellow posters with suspicion.

If the unrec feature is truly going away, I suspect the atmosphere here will greatly improve.

[Generic Other]

20. Some "unrecers" stand behind their posts and say so

I can respect that; however, I would rather they said something to me because I prefer feedback and discussion.

[CTyankee]

21. I was where you are about a year ago or so and I said what you said (altho not as well

as you have done!). Then I decided that the only way to handle the whole Rec/Unrec situation is thru irony. Whenever there was a thread about the subject, I would do my damndest to make it "theatre of the absurd." Because basically the play's dialogue would go something like this:

"Coward!"
"Whiner!"
"Coward!"
"Whiner!"

Well, you get the drift. My aim was to show the utter silliness of each of these threads and viewing it as absurd was the only way I could make "sense" of it. Here we were, a political website devoted to progressive ideals and with work to be done and we let the debate degenerate into a verbal version of a food fight at sleepaway camp.

As a fond farewell to the whole Rec/Unrec thing, I will do the only courageous thing and that is to Rec this thread...

[Generic Other]

25. Oh my goodness

You just had to mention food fight! I will just say this about that. I was in 10th grade, had a poor aim and never ever meant to smack the vice principal with green jello. Honest. And when none of the rest of you backed me up. What a sad spectacle. I am still seething.

[CTyankee]

30. Hey, you got the hang of it real quick! Fun, isn't it?

You could also "egg" each side on seriatim so nobody knew where you stood on the question! That was fun, too. People got confused...ah, those days will be no more...sad to see...

[w8liftinglady]

22. I'd have no prob with an unrec if it required a comment

we see too many threads unreccd without validation...

[Generic Other]

28. Lately it seemed as if every thread of any substance was "unreced"

I would "rec" strong posts to no avail. Just seemed like it was being used as a censorship tool. And an easy editorial criticism of a poster's observations, political stance, personality, screen name....

[w8liftinglady]

37. I had most of my anti-war posts unreccd by the freepers that hide in the background

[Generic Other]

41. Not cool at all!

Excellent example of using the feature to control the direction of the dialogue.

[hfojvt]

39. but a comment just kicks an OP back to the top

If you unrec something, you are saying to the world "don't read this OP", but by kicking it, you are ensuring that more people will read it. Although, I can kick and kick my own threads and still end up almost being a one man band http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=439&topic_id=216082

[hfojvt]

27. I picked up a couple unrecs the other day

but I still support the feature.

Suppose you read a post that has 10 recs, and you think it is drivel, or false, or mean-spirited and bad for progressives. You can post an awesome rebuttal to it. However, as post #19 or post #27 in a thread your rebuttal is going to get about 1/10th of the views of the OP. The OP that you just kicked back to the top of the front page. The OP that has 10 recs. Recs that give the message to other visitors of DU "this OP is worth reading". The unrec feature allows people to disagree with that and vote "no, this OP is not worth reading".

One reason I come to DU is to try to help the country become more progressive. Being able to unrec posts that work against that purpose helps in that cause. At least in theory. In actual practice, I usually just get outvoted.

[Generic Other]

38. I'd rather read your opposing view in the thread than a silent veto

I hate that Congress can do this. They routinely kill bills with secret shenanigans behind the scenes. I think they are slime when they do that. They black ball stuff. That's how they used to keep people (of color, Catholics and Jews) out of exclusive (WASP) clubs at one time too. It has an ugly feel.

Reminds me of Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery." "Lottery in June, corn be growing soon..."

[hfojvt]

56. I can assure you

that no villagers were harmed in the unreccing of that post.

Most people do not react favorably to an opposing viewpoint. And most people will not read it. It's not nearly as visible as the OP.

Let me try an analogy. Suppose you are on a message board and somebody posts a sexist joke. The typical guy response is ROFLMAO. So the guys are giving this R, R, R, R. (for ROFLMAO). Suppose you object to the sexism in the joke. If you post a rebuttal, that is just gonna kick that thread back to the top where more guys will read it (and many, many fewer will read your rebuttal way down-thread) and react with ROFLMAO, exactly what you do not want. The other point is that a thread with 10 or 15 R's is gonna say "this is a great thread, well worth reading" but if 8 people who agree with me can vote against it, then it is down to just 7 and it looks a little less worthwhile, meaning that fewer people will look at it. And this is more true, the more people who agree with me. It could be voted down to zero and thus get many fewer views.

[Generic Other]

59. I read these very threads with the most interest!

I enjoy the heated dialogue, the chance to hear the discussion. I wait for the strongest arguments to be raised. I am allowed to become engaged and educated about a subject. I don't need filters protecting me from this debate, deliberately keeping it from being seen.

I learn something from even the most divisive threads. Even the lame ones.

[CTyankee]

96. You know, I actually forget it's there most of the time...

I guess I'm just too damn old to give a crap what people think any more...I don't know whether that's bad or good.:shrug:

[Hippo_Tron]

162. You assume people decide what is worthy of reading by the front page and "The Greatest"

I go straight to the forums, skipping over that nonsense. I bet a lot of others do as well.

[hfojvt]

187. actually I meant the first (front) page of GD

I used to find good stuff on page two or three of GD and kick it back to the first page but for a couple of years I think I have mostly been looking at the first page and not making it any further than the second.

And, as you look at the first page you have to decide what threads to click on. So you read the title. A good title can draw you in. "Hmmmm, let's see what Michael Moore, (or Dean Baker, or Howard Dean, or Robert Reich, etc.) is saying" or "here's one about an issue I care about/have knowledge of" or "another DU is wailing about the Unrec function, let's try to reason with him/her"

But then having scanned titles, a person is likely to check the recommendations. Maybe the title does not grab me, but it has 27 Rs so more than a few people think it is worth reading. It seems logical to me, that a larger number of Rs is going to increase the chances that people will read it, even if not everyone decides what to read based on Rs.

[BoWanZi]

32. If unreccing is going away, so should reccing.

No unreccing gives a false overall sense to the post in question.

Seems so emotionally fake and "nannyish" (not sure if that is a word).

Its like saying "we have to protect the feelings of everyone" which is getting very old these days. I don't believe that everyone's feelings have to be protected all the time. Lets get a sense of reality here. Unreccing adds a bit of reality even if its cowardish in some ways.

[BoWanZi]

36. ...and for the record, I only look at unrecs vs recs as a overall sense of a post, nothing more

I don't ever ever go to the main page of DU to look at the latest and greatest. i only mainly hover around here so I don't care if a post is kicked to the main greatest page or whatever it is, that is minor and really irrelevant to reccing vs unreccing as far as I'm concerned.

[pintobean]

40. It's an ego deflater and I love it

I use it based on the merit of the OP, but it's fun to see the popularity contestants go nuts over it. Anonymous unrecs get whined about, and if someone explains their unrec, they get savaged.
The admins have repeatedly said that its not trolls, but that gets ignored.

[Generic Other]

43. I guess I just like to argue with you rather than have you fart in my general direction and move on

Not you personally, of course as your farts smell like roses, but you know what I mean! :)

[pintobean]

46. It's just a vote on whether a post is worthy of the greatest page

If we argue about it in the thread, we're hijacking the thread. Why doesn't anyone ever demand that recs get explained? It's an equal vote.

[Generic Other]

54. Disagreeing with a post is hijacking a thread???

No way!! Then I am the hijacker-in-thief! I want to argue with you!

[pintobean]

58. About the worthiness of the greatest page?

That's not the same as arguing the subject of the post.

[Generic Other]

60. Passive aggressive editorial commentary

You disagree with a post's worth, but you don't bother to say so directly to the OP. Why have a message board if we are all doing everything in silence and secrecy?

[pintobean]

64. I use it as the anmins intended it.

They've explained it over and over. You either fail to comprehend, or you refuse to. I think it is quite possible that you just like to argue and don't care about the subject or the points made. I won't entertain you any more.

[Renew Deal]

73. Yes, those egotists that post amber alerts that get unrecced are really put in their place.

:eyes:

[madinmaryland]

42. Un-reccing for whining about the un-rec feature.

I unrec stuff that I feel does not belong on DU greatest page (like this thread!)

[Generic Other]

44. The feature is being phased out

so get it out of your system while you still can.

[madinmaryland]

47. The point of the feature was to insure the best of DU got on the greatest

page. I think it worked pretty well at that. The fact a few trolls would un-rec a good thread was rarely enough to keep it off the greatest page.

As I said, the reason I un-rec stuff is that I don't want it showing up on the greatest page. A thread like this is the perfect example of why I un-rec a thread.

[pintobean]

61. +1

[SidDithers]

68. Well said. You get it...nt

Sid

[Renew Deal]

85. Doesn't the rec feature ensure the same thing?

The problem is that well conceived, but differing opinions would get punished just for being unpopular.

[muriel_volestrangler]

125. What a crappy comment: "get it out of your system while you still can"

Why do you claim to know that the reason someone unrecs is because they have a problem they need to "get out of their system", when they've told you, directly, they do it to stop bad threads ending up on the Greatest page? Why just ignore what DUers say to you, and ascribe a bad motive to them instead?

For that matter, why call it "passive aggressive" to someone who again says it's about the quality of the Greatest page? Do you have any respect for what DUers who think differently from you say at all?

[Generic Other]

130. the passive aggressives do it anonymously

Many of the public posters do it with just a wee bit of snark. That's all I am saying.

I also do ascribe bad motives to censors. Nature of the activity they are involved in. Don't much like to find myself in that position. I prefer to offer an opposing argument if I find someone's ideas to be "bad." Simply hiding them is intellectually dishonest.

[muriel_volestrangler]

133. No, it's not "all you're saying"; you're saying a DUer is lying about why they do it

They told you one thing; you claimed it was really something else.

No, it's not 'intellectually dishonest' to rate someone's OP as "a waste of time". As people have frequently pointed out, they don't want to give a crappy thread the extra visibility that a full answer gives it.

I'd be happy if there was a separate list of unrecommenders and their reasons for a thread, as long as it didn't kick the thread up the list of "most recently updated". That way, thread starters could see why people thought the OP wasn't worth it, without it seeming to others that it's an interesting thread.

[Generic Other]

148. here you are making multiple posts on a thread you dislike

and accusing me of ad hominem attacks while calling my posts "crappy." Hmmmm...

[muriel_volestrangler]

163. I called that one post 'crappy'; it's an attack on the post, and nothing to do with 'ad hominem'

attacks. "Hmmmmm..."? OK, hmmmm, what do you mean by that?

Yes, I'm making posts on a thread I don't think is great - because it's a bit of DU navel-gazing. I'd never recommend someone new to DU to bother with this thread, nor those whose DU time is limited - which is the 2 audiences I see for the Greatest page, and thus the recs and unrecs. I think it's worth arguing with you about this - I don't see a problem with this thread getting kicked, if we can get some decent discussion out of it. Sometimes, though, there are threads that are based on a false report in the OP, or which are designed to start a fight on DU. Those are the kind of threads for which unrec is very useful - to keep their visibility as low as possible.

[snagglepuss]

45. +1

[seabeyond]

48. unrec is needed if we keep rec. nt

[Renew Deal]

72. Why?

I think rec is a simple concept. The more recs it gets, the more popular it is. I don't think we need the unrec counterbalance.

[seabeyond]

you get an offensive piece that is ugly to a group, that others are tickled with

and in mass the rec....

need the ability to counteract the ugly

[Renew Deal]

82. I think it depends on what you consider ugly

If it's too ugly to be on DU, it will be removed. If it's a disagreement about facts or opinion, it won't get as many recs. There were threads in the old days pre-unrec that got 0 recs.

[seabeyond]

87. wrong.... there is much in pushing the line of what is allowed on du. that is the liberal we are

people with their cute little uglies know how to push that line. and it gets out there without being deleted. we see it often. most of us know how to do it and do it well. the only recourse available was the unrec to keep it contained, at best

[SidDithers]

93. I hope both are gone in DU3.0...nt

Sid

[seabeyond]

98. i could do having both, or having neither. works for me. nt

[Generic Other]

51. Would unreccer's be offended if people said they should be "ignored" for incivility?

I wouldn't do it because it's unworthy of consideration. And as I said I'd rather engage in a heated discussion. But it is true that if you routinely abuse this tool as a form of editorial commentary, you run the risk of being seen as hostile and unfriendly.

[stuntcat]

52. ty

it has some use I suppose, but still I've never done it. What I've seen way too much is people using it like children, bad as any bratty 12-yr-old, wasting so much space and time with it, it made me ashamed how people have acted here.

I do like recommending things sometimes (we can be positive together see..) but I can do without that if it means no more of the silly games and hate I've seen people stoop to since the unRecs started.

[Odin2005]

55. I disagree. Unrec helps keep highly polarizing threads OFF the greatest, which is a good thing.

[Generic Other]

62. Why is it a good thing?

Are we then all expected to toe a party line with no disagreements? Are we Jimbob bots? Have we no freewill? No ability to debate?

[seabeyond]

76. to deny the unrec when allowed the rec is doing exactly what you suggest

denyong disagreement..... making it jimbob bots.... no free will and inability to debate.

how ironic

[Renew Deal]

81. I disagree

I think it presents all opinions. The "popularity contest" gets balanced out by the number of recs. The more popular stuff will have more recs. But at least unpopular, but worthwhile content will be showcased too.

[seabeyond]

83. and many unpopular, but just ugly will make it too, without ability to do a thing about it

leaving people without the ability to counter, ....

[Renew Deal]

86. How do you define "ugly?"

Anything truly ugly is locked or deleted.

[seabeyond]

88. no, it is not. nt

[Renew Deal]

89. OK, so how do you define ugly?

:shrug:

[Odin2005]

97. Wow, way to put words into my mouth.

I meant that it keeps the tediously predictable flame-wars off the greatest. Every flame-war that starts up between us Progressives and the Obama Cheerleaders does not deserve to be on the Greatest Page because they are predictable as hell.

[Generic Other]

104. I like to think I could be on either or both sides sometimes

I prefer hearing the discussion not the tally of people who think I should or should not bother reading something.

[Renew Deal]

75. You mean opinions that you disagree with.

...

[seabeyond]

77. if you are being snarky about a poster disagreeing, why are you so afraid of it thru rec/unrec

the ironic is amazing in this argument

[Renew Deal]

79. Huh?

What does one have to do with the other?

[seabeyond]

80. huh? nt

[Odin2005]

No, any highly polarizing thread, even ones, say, criticizing the Prez, that I agree with.

[Generic Other]

103. who watches the watchers?

Let me decide for myself what is worth reading or not.

[seabeyond]

117. rec or unrec stops no one from reading or not. bogus argument. nt

[Generic Other]

124. it makes unpopular ideas disappear from view at times

When I post info on BP, I am surprised when it is "unrecc'd" rather than discussed. I also know there are a few posters who do not think BP is doing a bad job with the oil spill because they say so and "unrec" threads that state otherwise. We have had some BP cheerleaders post here who don't like anyone here disagreeing with the company.

[seabeyond]

129. so what. it doesnt stop people from reading or discussing a thread unless you suggest

people actually ONLY read a thread if there are so many recs.

i have NEVER, never once read or not read due to looking at number of records. i look at the subject title and decide if i want to read. then i read. i then decide if i want to comment.

rec/unrec has nothing to do with my interest reading or not reading a thread.

[Generic Other]

107. Like the ever-edited comment section of Sarah Palin's FB account

Makes a mockery of debate and discussion.

[MilesColtrane]

91. And don't forget the inane "Kick and Recommend If You Think _____".

If someone really wants to test the opinion of members on a certain subject, a poll makes sense.

People do the the above kind of threads just to see if they can get on the Greatest Page.

[Odin2005]

99. Those threads are anoying.

[Kurovski]

144. Misspellings are annoying!

Unrec! Unrec! :-)

[Odin2005]

145. LOL!

:hi:

[Kurovski]

156. If it weren't for spellcheck...

I'd be annoying the hell out of myself everyday. :hi:

[Vinnie From Indy]

66. I like the unrec feature

In fact, it has inspired me to incorporate into my daily living. I spend a great deal of my day moving about "unreccing" things that annoy, disturb or anger me. It works with people too! If I am having a conversation with someone that I want to end, I simply hold up my hands and say "unrec" and walk away. I routinely "unrec" in my mind and sometimes verbally things like ugly babies, people in the 20 or less lane with fifty items, women who take a half hour to dig out their pocketbook to pay for their items when they had plenty of time waiting in line to get prepared to pay, cars that thump too loud etc. etc. etc.

Now when I read the Greatest page, I will have to suffer through all manner of posts about somebody's cat having halitosis or some guy earning a Darwin award by sticking gummy bears up his nose.

I like the unrec feature so much that sometimes I try to "unrec" my own posts.

"I would never join a club that would have someone like me as a member" Groucho Marx

Cheers!

[Renew Deal]

74. LOL

:rofl:

[Generic Other]

100. Vinnie!! You da bomb!!

The government and media does it too! Everyday! Unrec wikileaks! Unrec Black box voting! Unrec Gulf Oil Spill news! Unrec anything at any time they don't want us to talk about!

DU/FOX in action!

[InvisibleTouch]

92. I thought it had its place.

I only used it on rare occasions, but there *were* occasions when it was needed. For those who feel it was a license for cowardice, I would say that there are threads so absurd and inappropriate that they don't even deserve the time to post a rebuttal - but a quick click of the "unrec" can still get the point across.

I'd like to see it stay. I thought it was useful. But it's not such a big deal to me either way.

[TheKentuckian]

94. I think you should comment before being allowed to rec or unrec

[xchrom]

95. IMO -- i'd like to see the greatest page and the rec feature go as well. nt

[Generic Other]

102. The greatest page allows us to keep in touch with important info

especially outreach stuff about DUer's and important information. It also allows busy DUers to find some of the most talked-about topics of the day. UNrec threads hides all the news and opinion someone thinks should be censored!

[CTyankee]

167. I confess that I don't bother with the Greatest Page. I go immediately

to the discussion threads, GD and GDP. Sometimes I never get past those two but I try to glance at Political Videos so I can catch up on Rachel (I'm a morning person altho during spells of insomnia I have been known to post at 2 a.m.). I thought the Greatest Page, while harmless, was really a Popularity Contest. I really didn't care that much, actually, just as I've never used Ignore since I am perfectly able to just ignore all by myself!

[SidDithers]

110. Agreed...

or at least a greatest page with a better criteria. Most Views, or Most Replies maybe.

Sid

[Better Believe It]

105. I never use the unrecommend feature because it's undemocratic

[SidDithers]

109. Undemocratic! ROFL!...

the question being voted on, when rec and unrec are used is "Is this thread worthy of appearing on DU's greatest page?"

With Unrec your choices are:
Unrec (No)
Rec (Yes)
Abstain


Without Unrec your choices are:
Rec (Yes)
Abstain


And you think that having unrec as a choice is somehow undemocratic? :rofl:

Too fucking funny.

sid

[Generic Other]

111. I think an obstructionist republican voting block is undemocratic

It does nothing to advance anything.

[Upton]

118. This thread is drowning in unrecs..

must be all the fault of that "obstructionist republican voting block".. :eyes:

[Generic Other]

122. a sarah palin FB page then

and don't roll your green with envy eyes at me.

[Upton]

114. Voting a post up or down..

is about as Democratic as you can get..

[UTUSN]

113. Rec but the total is still zero, so we know what THAT means!1 n/t

[WillyT]

119. Yeah... You'll Have To Pry The Unrec Feature Out Of Their Cold...

:evilgrin:

I recced the OP too.

Ah well...

:hi:

[Kurovski]

141. !

:D. WillyT, you sly puss! :thumbsup:

[Generic Other]

120. I think it means I am stupid, have bad breath, am smelly and my mother wears combat boots

that I live in a trailer park, watch Jerry Springer, live in a pig sty in my mom's basement, eat spaghetteos for breakfast, wear a bathrobe all the time, fart a lot, play donkey kong in my spare time, drink Big Gulps by the gallon, can't get a job because my face is tattooed like a barcode, drink lite beer, and never shower. Ever.

[SidDithers]

121. It simply means that IMO, your post isn't worthy of DU's greatest...

if you read more into it than that, well that's all on you.

Sid

[Generic Other]

127. hey you already unrecc'd me once upthread

why are you still here?

[SidDithers]

137. First, you want discussion...

now you don't.

:shrug:

Sid

[Generic Other]

149. I thought you unrecc'd so you didn't have to discuss my crappy ideas

sorry my bad.

[SidDithers]

151. No, I unrecc'd because I didn't think your crappy OP was worthy of DU's Greatest Page...

some of your crappy ideas posted later in the thread, however, do deserve a comment.

Sid

Edit: better wording

[Generic Other]

153. oh yeah you spare others from being exposed to my crappy OP

gosh what a good hall monitor you are.

[SidDithers]

154. No, I'm expressing my opinion on what I believe...

as all DUers are entitled to do.

And trust me, your crappy OP has been exposed to many, many DU'ers. This crappy thread has 155 replies and over 1600 views even without a positive rec rating.

See how meaningless the rec rating system is? And how silly you are to take it so seriously.

Sid

[Generic Other]

155. I am not the one who takes it seriously, Sid

I am the one who posted the observation that I think DU was better before it came and will be better when it's gone. My opinion. Equal to yours. Not < than or > than. I don't care how many people read my "crappy" posts. Or flame me. After 10 years here, I have the sense to wear flame retardant panties.

on edit:

I shouldn't be unkind to one whose whole raison d'être for posting at DU is the "unrec" function. Maybe now you will actually make posts of substance so we can debate real issues.

[SidDithers]

160. Maybe, if you post about issues of substance, we will...

now, don't you have the latest media release from floridaoilspilllaw to cut and paste?

Sid

Edit: spelling

[Generic Other]

165. Any information any site posts about BP that I find YES I certainly shall "cut and paste"

I think I would not be exaggerating to say I am one of only two or three people on DU who continues to post information about the Gulf Oil spill at all! You however have an army of "unreccers" making sure that vital information is not shared without your authorization.

on edit:
Additionally. Thanks for always unreccing my "crappy" and "worthless" BP posts.

[A HERETIC I AM]

215. What an absolute load of bollocks.

"You however have an army of "unreccers" making sure that vital information is not shared without your authorization."

Bullshit.

There is NO ARMY OF UNRECCERS.

Jesus H. Christ on a corner selling candied apples.

[Generic Other]

217. This thread has been rec'd all day

it hasn't broken zero.

Seems to suggest there is at least a platoon of "unrecc'rs" showing me who's the boss.

[A HERETIC I AM]

221. Here's what you apparently fail to grasp....

and it has been noted time and time again;

ANY thread talking about the unrec feature gets unrecc'd in an overwhelming way. This has been shown to be the case repeatedly, as the MAJORITY of DU'rs favor the system as it now exists and are tired of those who complain about it.

No one is trying to show you who's the boss.

No one is trying to silence you.

No one is trying to tell you you don't shower often enough.

What they are telling you is that this subject has been beat to fucking death and as such, any thread on the subject has no place being considered a "greatest thread", yet there is always someone who insists on complaining about it. There have been numerous polls posted in GD about the subject and they ALWAYS favor keeping the unrec feature by a huge margin. Always. Here is a perfect example

What amazes me is that it has been several weeks now with no threads on the subject. That has to be a record.

Just in case you never saw it, here's my "Ode to Unrec;

Oh unrec, you message board feature sublime,
Have you simply appeared ahead of your time?
Why is it you gather such silly attention?
When all you want is a little affection.

At times your usage makes some come unglued
when your result is simply nonsense subdued.
Even though your application is most voluntary
the contempt for you is oddly quite scary

It's as if in your absence, a thread that's not hot
still warranted a greatest page-ward swat.
Some will insist the jury's still out
But the job you've done is nothing but stout.

Eliminating crap and gratuitous clutter.
Place self serving bullshit in a well deserved gutter.
"I WON'T POST! I WON'T POST! I WON'T POST NO MORE!
IT'S YOU UNRECCERS MAKING LIFE SUCH A CHORE!"

Suggesting all threads of obscure import
deserve to be making the greatest page sort
is like saying a toddlers crude block construction
earns inclusion in Architecture Today's production


Oh unrec, oh unrec, you feature supreme
make it easy to see if a thread holds esteem
by a majority of our fine message board
instead of just five that are easily scored.

Here is an edited post of mine on the subject from last August

Prior to its inception, all it took for ANY thread to get on the greatest page was simply 5 votes. This allowed all manner of threads, including such banal nonsense as "Rec if you like kitties" and other such crap to be considered a great thread. There were essentially two voting choices back then - Yay or Abstain. Now there are three choices. Yay, Nay and Abstain. I, like I'm sure the overwhelming number of DU'rs, simply abstain from voting on the vast majority of threads. What is the point of voting on every single one of them? Surely they are not all deserving of being voted on period, much less voted on as great. However, having the ability to vote Nay allows me to express my opinion that a particular thread is NOT worthy of inclusion on the greatest threads page. By simply voting that way it does not shut the thread down, it doesn't lower the number of eyes that see it, it doesn't stifle argument, it isn't a comment on the integrity of the posts author and it is by no means censorship (all arguments used against unrec). It is simply an anonymous vote. What gets eyes on threads is REPLIES because constant replies, (and even infrequent but steady replies, as evidenced by this thread) is what keeps a thread on the front page of a forum and near the top.

Just because I or anyone else unrecs a thread, it does not mean they hate the individual who wrote OP, it does not mean they are some sort of coward or troll and it doesn't mean they necessarily disagree with the point made in the OP. It simply means "In my opinion, this thread does not warrant inclusion on the greatest page."

THAT'S ALL IT MEANS.

Does the 2nd or 3rd or 15th thread on the same subject deserve to be a greatest thread? No.
Does the 2nd or 3rd or 15th thread on the same subject that is the best written or the most eloquent deserve to be on the greatest page? Perhaps. But, like most democratic processes, majority rules. Its just the with the greatest page you need a majority plus 4 more.

As I said in my "Ode to Unrec;

Suggesting all threads of obscure import
deserve to be making the greatest page sort
is like saying a toddlers crude block construction
earns inclusion in Architecture Today's production

Not EVERY SINGLE pile of blocks a kid put together is a masterpiece of engineering. Not every single thread deserve to have a positive rec count.


Oh unrec, oh unrec, you feature supreme
make it easy to see if a thread holds esteem
by a majority of our fine message board
instead of just five that are easily scored.

As I said above, and has been pointed out HUNDREDS OF TIMES OVER THE LAST YEAR, before unrec all it took was 5 UNANSWERABLE votes to get a thread onto the greatest page. Now you actually have to have a majority plus 4 more. It shows that, of the people inclined to vote at all, a thread does have enough merit.

The people who put up threads and then include as a reply to their own thread things like "Someone unrecc'd this?!?" strike me as among the most pitiful. It is as if they are saying "How on earth could there possibly be someone out there who thinks my excrement has an odor?!?" It strikes me as utterly pointless and just screams out I NEED VALIDATION THAT WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IS WONDERFUL! It is a bullshit point of view and smacks of an extreme lack of self respect and confidence.

As far as the argument that someone should (or be required to) post a reason why they would unrec, this is also fallacious because posting to a thread kicks the thread back to the top of the forums front page. Why on earth would I want to kick a thread simply because I voted against it being on the greatest page? No one ever suggests a requirement that one post when they rec a thread, and this happens all the time, just look at the front page of GD and you'll often see threads with more recs than replies. The idea that there is some sort of organized "unreccing" going on is also nonsense. Every single DU'r who has read one of these threads that I have posted on knows my opinion on the feature, yet not once, NOT ONE SINGLE TIME have I received a PM saying "Hey Heretic, go to this thread and unrec it!" It doesn't happen.

The unrec feature works just fine. It is just that the people like you who are against it can't seem to get their minds around the fact that the sun indeed does not rise and set out of their backsides and not everything that flies off their fingertips on this message board can compare to Homer or Tolstoy.

Constantly complaining that members of this community use a feature of this board that the administrators installed is indeed WHINING. It's like complaining that I didn't bookmark a thread or hide a thread or click the "add as a friend" icon. It's none of your business why anyone else uses the feature. It is time to get over it. Your side lost the war. If you are so concerned that someone who you have never met might have the temerity to vote No on a thread on an obscure message board (and trust me, DU is pretty obscure, as the vast majority of Democrats in this country do NOT post here nor are they aware it even exists) then I would question your perspective.

It isn't the end of the world.

I can completely sympathize with Skinner doing away with the feature, however. Those DU'rs who hate the idea that someone might not think everything that flies off their fingertips is the literal equivalent of unicorn poop just won't get over it.

[Generic Other]

224. I am totally cool with getting rid of it...I am not the one having problems getting over it

Like I said I found it divisive and a way to put a damper on real conversation. I'd rather talk to you then have a "k&r" or an "unrec."

Used to be on DU, if someone started a thread on any topic, someone like Kheph would post a half dozen links to news articles, someone like KPete would post links to major blogs, government websites, etc. Remember how the Black Box Voting threads grew with links and analysis and discussion. Even major disagreements. Now they are full of posts telling us someone likes or doesn't like something. No input. No communication. Nothing to add to any thread or topic worth wasting time doing.

I read threads to learn something about topics people who know more than me share with us.

[A HERETIC I AM]

225. Here's the part of that response I find most amusing;

Now they are full of posts telling us someone likes or doesn't like something. No input. No communication. Nothing to add to any thread or topic worth wasting time doing.

You actually think there is no input or communication on this message board anymore? Really?

Have you looked at the front page of GD in the last 5 minutes?

There are 24 threads that have had comments posted to them in the last ten minutes alone. 18 of the threads on the front page have the flame icon, meaning there are over 50 posts each.
Of all the threads that show up on the front page, 58 of them have over 200 views and 22 of them with over 1000, several over 3000 views. It can not be said that there is no discussion.

Of course you are cool with it going away. You think unrec does something it doesn't do. "Put a damper on real conversation".

I say bullshit.

[Generic Other]

226. Big difference between those who post their opinions and those who post unrecs and run

Big difference. I am just saying I prefer to read the discussions for myself, thanks. I state again, bullshit or not, I am happy to see "unrec" sink like a unworthy thread to the bottom of the DU dumpster.

[Kurovski]

142. Oh man...you are livin' La Vida Loca!

How can you do that in today's economy? We need to know the secret!

[Rabrrrrrr]

116. Remove "unrec" from DU and add it to the ballots in elections!

"Sorry, candidate A, you got -120000 votes; and your opponent got -98000. Since no one got a positive amount, looks like neither of you get the office, and we start over with new people."

[WillyT]

126. UnRec Is Going Away ???

:bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce::woohoo::bounce:

:party::toast::party::toast::party:

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[Generic Other]

128. I'm with you....

We can try actually talking to each other again.

[WillyT]

131. It Morphed From Unreccing A Post, To Unreccing The Poster...

thereby becoming personal, and adding to the incivility.

Something I've... "whined" about several times here.

:shrug:

:hi:

[MoonRiver]

132. It is getting tombstoned???

Haven't been on a lot lately. I'd be soooo happy if that happens.

[WillyT]

134. Check Post # 53

:hi:

[MoonRiver]

146. Awesome!

:bounce: :hi:

[WillyT]

214. Me Too !!!

:bounce::woohoo::bounce:

:hi:

[apocalypsehow]

136. It was an excellent tool to keep silliness & dross off the greatest page - and it was always very

telling to see who moaned, pissed, and complained about it the most: the folks posting the vast majority of silliness & dross on this website.

I, for one, will be sorry to see it go. The whiners have won. :thumbsdown:

[SidDithers]

138. I just hope that rec goes with it...

at least there was balance when we had rec/unrec options on a thread.

Sid

[apocalypsehow]

139. That's an excellent point, one I hadn't really thought about before. I agree 100%.

:thumbsup:

[Generic Other]

152. you agree that anyone who doesn't agree with you is silly and dross?

How very open-minded of you.

[apocalypsehow]

164. I know I've prevailed on any given issue when the replies I get are either (a) a personal attack or

(b) some version of putting words into my mouth, or (c) both.

As your reply falls squarely into column (b), your concession is duly accepted. :thumbsup:

[Generic Other]

150. My asscheeks are named "silliness and dross"

Glad to meet ya.

[apocalypsehow]

169. I know I've prevailed on any given issue when the replies I get are either (a) a personal attack or

(b) some version of putting words into my mouth, or (c) both.

As this reply falls squarely into column (a), your secondary concession is, as it was above, duly accepted. :thumbsup:

[Generic Other]

170. You are correct. I misquoted and maligned you

You did not say all those who disagree are silly or dross. You just said all you "unrec" are. Silly me.

[Broken_Hero]

199. ...

:thumbsup:

[Kurovski]

140. Agreed. Can't wait for it to be gone.

I gave you a rec', but...you know. :-)

[Catherina]

157. Aw Jesus Fucking Christ. Unrec. n/t

[Kurovski]

158. Unrec for blasphemy!

:-)

[Vickers]

166. Unrec for using big words!!!

:P

[Kurovski]

171. Unrecc' for exposing tongue!

Such unmitigated filth! :bounce:

[Generic Other]

173. unrec for explicit biological references

to what could be seen as sex organs. Naughty boy!

[Vickers]

174. Unrec for being judgmental!!!

:crazy:

[Kurovski]

175. Unrec' for accusing DUer of insanity!

[Generic Other]

177. unrec for pointing a fish stick at me in a threatening manner

One made out of Gulf fish fillets.

[Kurovski]

182. Unrec' for hallucinatory imagery counter-productive to what I wish to discuss.

A recommendation that med-time is so most certainly upon "us".

acquiesce to point about Gulf toxicity.

Now regret unrecc'.

[Generic Other]

183. oops unrecc'd by accident!

My bad.

[Kurovski]

184. Oh here! I'll recc for you!

All better.

[Urban Prairie]

168. The rec/unrec feature would have been so much better, IMO, if it could be displayed next to the SN

of a person replying to the OP, showing their rec or unrec, and could do so only AFTER posting their reply...DU members would then be identified as one of those who recced/unrecced the topic. At least one reply made to the OP, and not just to another poster's reply within the thread could/should perhaps have been required in order to do either one.

It would likely have resulted in members perhaps thinking it over first, and using their head before their fast fingers, before responding, or much more likely, not replying at all. If I intended to unrec a thread, (and have done so very, very infrequently), I am not going to take what I consider to be the cowardly way out, and fail to explain why I did so in a reply to the OP.

Anyway, it is probably not always the OP and/or their topic that causes someone to unrec a thread, as it may very well, and often may be the result of a spat between two or more who reply to each other's posts WITHIN the thread.

[Generic Other]

172. Oh no the unreccr's always have good motives the silly reccer's bad ones

The unreccer motto:

There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image; make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your television set. You are about to participate in a great adventure. You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to the outer limits.

[SoCalDem]

176. Uggo, the Unreccer

his real life pic:

[Generic Other]

179. Gasp! ROFLMAO

Where's my hatpin? That's too funny. What is it filled with?

[SoCalDem]

180. farts?

:rofl:

[Kurovski]

185. !

:rofl: :rofl:

it's funny because it looks like it's probably true. :rofl:

[Urban Prairie]

186. "Uggo" looks just like Moe did during a Three Stooges "short" titled Dizzy Pilots

When Moe slipped and fell into a bathtub-full of gooey black tar, while they worked in an airplane hangar, then Larry and Curly tried to clean him up by filling up the tar-covered Moe with gas from a tank of helium. Larry soon had to shoot Moe down out of the sky with a rifle after he floated to the ceiling and then out of the hangar's open skylight. That short was hilarious, and is one of many of my favorites from them...heh!!

[Kurovski]

210. I remember being horrified by that when I was a child.

Now when I see it, I just pretend Moe is Rushbo. If Rush, Sarah (Larry-rifle) and O'reilly got together, who is qualified to say that WOULDN'T happen? :shrug:

[Mr Generic Other]

205. are you a bowling ball?

[Generic Other]

206. unrec for being my sig other and sneaking on this thread to hijack it

with your lame-o comment! Silly!

[Kurovski]

209. WTF

:rofl:

[SoCalDem]

208. I see Uggo, the Unreccer, as a bit of self-righteous gasbag

:rofl:

[Kurovski]

211. Yes, but exactly how many holes does he have?

I need to know whether I should hire him or not.

[Mr Generic Other]

227. i will never

read another SoCalDem thread without seeing Uggo.
:)

[SoCalDem]

234. Ahh..but once un-rec goes, Uggo goes into retirement

I'm sure his ego will get a bit..well.. "deflated", when unreccers are no more running amok at DU :)..After that he would just be any generic guy in a rubber suit :)

[Mr Generic Other]

236. poor Uggo

i hope he doesn't plan on becoming the "generic guy". he'll have to arm wrestle me for that title.

[Lucky Luciano]

178. I have never intentionally unrecced anything...only recced like 2 or 3 times for that matter.

Someone who uses the feature is not necessarily being a coward. Could be that the topic is not of interest or they disagree, but don't have time to fully engage. I have very little free time myself and usually just engage with one sentence answers to most things - which more or less gives me a bookmark to come back to later for further reading.

That said, yes, there are indeed many people who appear to be paid to unrec anything and everything that a DUer should rec if given the choice between reccing and unreccing - either that or some bot has been set up to do it.

[Generic Other]

181. Like I am supposed to believe a guy named Lucky Luciano

never bumped one of us off the latest greatest page? Fegettaboutit!

:hi:

[Lucky Luciano]

216. Hey fuh-geddaboutit! I know you are a good fella! nt

[Arkana]

188. Only to the most thin-skinned and insecure among us.

"OH NO MY THREAD IS BEING UNRECOMMENDED ON AN INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD A BLOO BLOO BLOO"

[Generic Other]

189. OMG you burst my bubble! Farewell Cruel World!

I love you Uggo!

[Nailzberg]

190. Unrec'd

I don't blame the button for incivility.

[Generic Other]

192. Like that saying guns don't kill people, bullets do?

Sorry my post was so uncivil you could not stand the sight of it.

[brooklynite]

191. Unrec'd

In all seriousness, you can have an unrec function without being obnoxious about it, AND you can be obnoxious without having use of an unrec feature. In my case I have alway limited my unrec use to OP's which, in my opinion, make irresponsible assumptions without asserting any evidence to support them, AND I always post a response that explains my reasoning.

[Generic Other]

194. fair enough--unrec until the chickens come home to roost...

my only assertion in this thread was the one where I expressed pleasure at the fact the "unrec" feature is soon to be abolished. I believe it to be a good thing.

[Codeine]

193. The admins caved to the whiners.

Back to the cliques and popularity contests, I guess. I think it's quite pathetic that a feature is being removed because a handful of crybabies pissed and moan until they go their way, and it speaks poorly of the admins to have made such a decision.

That said -- his board, his rules. I'll live.

[Generic Other]

196. oh meee...oh myyyy

[MilesColtrane]

195. I can only hope that those of us who aren't happy the unrec function's being nixed...

get, in exchange, the ability to hide the Greatest page.

Because it will be going back to being filled with gratuitous "Check In If You Think Like Me" threads.

[Generic Other]

197. I think you can hide anything you want to

the GOP does it all the time.

on edit: went to check. Yup we have a button for it.

Ignore Threads: Selecting this option will prevent you from seeing any threads started by a member. You will still be able to see the member's replies to other threads. The member will not know that you are ignoring their threads.

WHAT A DEAL. A TWO'FER.

[MilesColtrane]

229. I'm not talking about hiding individual threads.

I'm talking about having the option of removing the "Greatest Threads" section from the DU Homepage.

[Generic Other]

233. We used to have guest writers and DUers who had a really well-written piece to share

I remember those were great. Plaid Adder did them, Bob Boudelang, Will and Earl G. and others. I even did one once.

[SoCalDem]

235. I did not even know that page existed for a LONG time after it was created

My desktop DU link goes straight to "MyDU" & from there I follow links to GD & whatever.. I NEVER go to Home or "Best-est-Shiniest-Wonderful-est-Greatest-Tippy-top-Ten". THAT'S the "clique" arena:)

You can hide any forum/page you want..by just not clicking on it:P...

[Broken_Hero]

198. Sorry, I disagree...-edit

I thought the unrec was one of the best new features the admin brought into DU the past few years. I'm sad to see it go.

eta:I did unrec this OP.

[Generic Other]

200. It's what the ignore button is for

Everything else the mods do better.

[Broken_Hero]

201. I don't ignore the things I disagree with....

:shrug: sorry, I don't put my head in the sand. If I see an OP that's worthless(IMO), I unrec....and I almost always unrec an OP griping about unrec, hence the unrec I gave your op.

[Generic Other]

204. but others use it in a far different fashion than your "pure" motives

they use it to squelch information they don't think others should read.

[Broken_Hero]

207. it happens both ways,

Before the unrec only 5 people had to rec a thread to get it to the greatest page for 24hrs. The unrec balanced that out quite a bit. I don't see it as squelching information. Currently your OP has zero rec's, but here we are sharing our pov(information) back and forth with one another.

I'm sure the Admins will implement something better, they always surprise me in situations like this, were it appears neither side can be satisfied. I always thought adding the unrec was a pretty democratic way of voting on an OP.

[Kurovski]

237. I think upping the requirement to 12 recc's is a good idea. (nt)

[WCGreen]

202. Unrecing and ignoring are easy ways to express displeasure...

I think I have used the Un Rec button less than ten times since its inception.

And if you ignore people you don't agree with, then you are Foxing yourself in...

Just my opinion.

[Generic Other]

203. Or worse...if someone upthread unrec's my BP posts

because they are "crappy" it is a way to silence me and slow the flow of the information.

[MisterP]

212. hooray for groupthink! now only one variety of cowardly, anonymous lynch-mob behavior will exist!

*stirring pot*

[Generic Other]

213. pssst...lynch mobs never form the posse to do something nice like rec a thread!

Get a grip, Pilgrim!

[MisterP]

218. you called those using it smug, passive-aggressive, "from the shadows," doing a "slap in the face"

akin to censorship, analogous to keeping "people (of color, Catholics and Jews) out of exclusive (WASP) clubs," mysteriously preventing you from "becom(ing) engaged and educated" as if though people aren't allowed out of the Greatest Page, likened it to coverups of BP and BBV, and stopping us from talking to each other
DU's nastiness comes from nasty posts, not too much choice
you get a grip

The reccer motto:

Today, we celebrate the first glorious anniversary of the Opinion Purification Directives. We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of pure ideology - where each worker may bloom, secure from the pests purveying contradictory truths. Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one people, with one will, one resolve, one cause. Our enemies shall be eaten by squirrels. We shall prevail!

[Generic Other]

219. Not being able to unrec me won't stop you from being able to mock and attack my opinions will it?

So what have you lost? Now you can use your inside voice to actually have a conversation with me. Or not.

[MisterP]

220. well, I probably disagree with you only on this point: my other post only quoted your other posts

intimating what it is that "unreccers" want
mostly my posts on DU are rants about the putrid homogeneity of Establishment politics, or parallels with Cold-War foreign and domestic policies. in all likelihood, if I'm interested in a Generic Other OP, I'm going to make a positive contribution (of course the OP would have to be about the ideological history of the US, Eastern Bloc science fiction, Latin America, deforestation, HP Lovecraft, demented internet phenoms from Encyclopedia Dramatica)
I often vehemently agree with one DUer or another on most of their issues--and then along comes a rant on how we shouldn't feel sorry for whales being killed, or how Lieberman was right, or how astrologers should be placed on an island and bombed; if it's outre and exceptional for the poster, I unrec, if it's unforgivable I unrec and use "ignore all except OPs" (which, by the way, is a godsend). I judge each policy, not the persons. DU isn't divided into honest people and shit-stirrers, or people who only mostly rec and only mostly unrec, or Alter's "movement" vs. "action" liberals, or centrists vs. leftists, or critics vs. slavish, Peter-Pettigrew-like cultists; it's a wild scattering of every combination of every one of those dualities. I like the recs and unrecs because they let me voice an opinion on a post without having to post WHY, especially since I'm not as adept at writing ethics as I am Cold-War and intellectual history, nor do I always put all my thoughts on the ether. however, I've always wanted the aggregate score broken up to give recs and unrecs separately.
for an extra 1MB or so our profiles could list how many recs and unrecs we've ever made, so it helps identify Nabobs of Negativism or echolaliacs
also, the mods/Admins are good at pinning requests for personal help and charity

[Generic Other]

223. But then I miss your voice Mr. P. because I want to hear what you think

I have read some of your rants, and I am sure agreed with you as often as I disagreed. But I did not "unrec" your posts because I didn't like what you said.

I am glad we could come together on this ridiculously long thread and talk today. Is that so bad?

[Turborama]

222. K&R (still at 0 though) n/t

[Spider Jerusalem]

230. No, the whining from people who were pissed at the unrec feature was a contributing factor...

to incivility. They're the ones who made it an issue. Difference of opinion is possible, after all. And do you have any idea what the "greatest threads" page looked like before the unrec feature? It was full of people saying "rec this if you agree that X", of lame and mindless crap, of begging for recommendations, and just generally a joke.

Personally I don't care much either way; I never use the Greatest page and don't have any use for it, I can find discussion topics that are of interest well enough on my own anyway. It's pretty emtertaining to see how incredibly bent out of shape some people get over the whole unrec thing though.

[Generic Other]

232. I never recc'd something unless I thought it was a great post

And many great posts have been made here at DU. Not every post is a vanity thread.