Do you think the rec/unrec system leads to reduced discussion on DU?

[Stinky The Clown]

We often see posts with a lot of meat to them given many, many recs, but having very few replies. It seems so easy to simply hit the rec button and move on. No engagement. No comments. Just click and go. Not even a "K&R".

The opposite also happens.

I've been on DU since 2004, so I can't claim to be a DU original or to know "the old days," but I can sure recall the days when recs were much more considered, only three got you on the Greatest Page and that almost never happened without a lot of discussion. DU was a thriving discussion board back then. The posts that would have garnered many comments and - wow! - let's say ten recs now fall like stones.

Along with the over dependence on the rec/unrec, what passes for discussion quite often degenerates rapidly from the OP. The number of deleted messages in any big thread is actually alarming. Rec/unrec wars. Squabbling over the most far out tangential points

What do you think? Has something been lost?









I know many will think me posting this is ironic.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

1. No, it doesn't influence me a bit. People who unrec me can kiss my royal Italian ass.

Hey, you asked.

:patriot:

[erodriguez]

65. Unrec

[villager]

2. well, this was unrecc'd by someone who couldn't be bothered discussing anything

...so I guess your point is pretty well proven!

[Stinky The Clown]

Heh! It sure does.

That's exactly one side of the kind of thing I'm talking about.

Recs without discussion are happier, but really no different.

[WillParkinson]

3. Yes. n/t

Just kidding.

I agree something has been lost. We're moving into the 'click-bites' (as opposed to sound bites). I think conversing about topics has been lost and too much time is spent on a rec/unrec, especially when the only thing a person has to say is 'unrec' but never bothers to explain why they feel the way they do. The same could be said for rec.

[Stinky The Clown]

14. My OP absolutely applies to recs as much as Unrecs

As I said above, recs are "happier," but that's about it.

[WillParkinson]

16. I know...

I am in complete agreement with you.

[thereismore]

4. Yes. The rec button is a meaningless copout. nt

[HopeHoops]

5. Unrec'd just to be an asshole.

:evilgrin: :hi:

[hfojvt]

6. no

people starting multiple threads does that. Instead of participating in a discussion people are starting their own threads and following them, which then pushes other topics off the front page.

[Maru Kitteh]

7. For the love of COD, LET IT GO......................

[hlthe2b]

8. leads to a lot of discussion of recs/unrecs and who does them...

;)

Seriously, though, I find it offensive that some factions on DU who are opposed to the content of the post or the POV that post mmight support, will continually unrec it until it disappears. Because of how rapidly threads move through GD, often the only way a thread receives continued notice is if it receives enough recs to make it to the "Greatest" page. I see this happening more and more and it really annoys me.

[CBGLuthier]

9. Using the greatest page is for those who follow the herd.

Never used it. Of no concern. More bugged by constant complaining about it than any other consequence of its existence.

But I come from the days before it existed.

[DCKit]

30. I disagree and rec things I think others should read.

However, that also indicates that I'm very self-centered in believing that everyone else should read what I'm interested in. I neither rec or unrec posts I consider neutral, just read 'em and move on.

Only recently have I begun to use unrec on the constant stream of "Obama Bad!" posts and their ilk. They're just clogging up the internet pipes and, in many cases, the ignorance is offensive.

[Cleita]

10. Maybe the administrators should consider limiting

recs and unrecs to three a day or something like that. It might make people think before throwing their recs and unrecs away because they can. I don't know if the software would permit something like that anyway. Right now I think the function is being abused by less than mature DUers who don't really care about a good discussion.

[blondeatlast]

11. Yes, I do. Threads can get tons of recs--and NO discussion at all

sometimes.

Lately, DU is more like a high school rivalry football game than a place to discuss, well, anything.

Um, rec-ing, because it's an important issue, actually.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. unrec'd on principle

and vacuous discussion included to negate OP's argument


mostly I think it is kittens watching football on tv, but that is just me.

[Stinky The Clown]

18. But at least you're discussing things

That's a good thing

[cherokeeprogressive]

13. Nnnnnnope. And unrec, as is my habit with every thread concerning unrec. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

19. So, in your view, it is definitionally impossible to have a discussion of discussions?

Which is what this discussion, which you discussed, at least in your thread title, actually is. In your view this discussion is unworthy of discussion even though, albeit tersely, you discussed not discussing it?

Have I got that right?

[cherokeeprogressive]

47. Zactly.

[Stinky The Clown]

54. Kewl

An exchange of thoughts. That's Communication.

[cherokeeprogressive]

56. 'Tis

[Stinky The Clown]

57. Ayup. N/T n/t

eom



By the way, my compliments on your tersitude. Its endearing.

[NightWatcher]

15. I would like a "thumbs up" and "thumbs down" column

As of now you might see a net plus one and avoid discussion. If there were a 34 positive and 33 negative, you'd know nearly 70 people had an opinion, so there might be more conversation initiated by that rating system.

[Forkboy]

17. I think it really only makes a difference to those who let it.

I've recced and unrecced, but never once have I let the amount, one way or the other, affect my decision to read a thread or not. I've never seen a thread with a ton of recs and decided to read it because of that, and I've never seen a thread with 0 recs and thought, "I have GOT to read that one!" because of it.

Every time the issue comes up I'm reminded of the line from Miller's Crossing, "What's all the rumpus?" :)

[Stinky The Clown]

21. I understand what you're saying, but that misses the point.

The OP was asking if, in your view, the rec/unrec system causes people to avoid taking the time to make a post, preferring, instead, to simply make a louse click.

I get it that it doesn't personally matter to some individuals, who like to say that about themselves. And that's fine. No problem there.

My question was about the larger group.

[blondeatlast]

23. "...louse click." In many cases, that's precisely what they are...

:rofl:

[Stinky The Clown]

46. Ack!

:blush:

That's a *very* unfortunate typo in this particular thread!

[Forkboy]

28. I have no way to know how many would have commented instead anyways.

For all we know, people still wouldn't comment even without it. For some, that choice may be the voice they choose to use here on DU and would never have commented any other way to begin with.

[SidDithers]

24. +1...nt

Sid

[UTUSN]

20. Yip, it would seem that just the Replying number of posts would equate with "Greatest" --that is,

topics that are kept on top because of the high number of (recent) Replies, withOUT regard to Recs. This is to say, "Greatest" in terms of DU would seem to mean topics that large numbers of DUers are interested in as shown by many Replies. But even this might lead to "empty" posts with nothing of content except "Kick." And the popularity of the poster would still be a factor since even now identical O.P./link threads vary in Replies: One thread gets zero while a Dupe thread gets a Brazillion.

[MineralMan]

29. That's how I'd treat it if it were my discussion forum.

The Greatest List would be best if it led people to threads that were under active discussion. It is, after all, a discussion forum. But, DU is not my discussion forum, so it's not my call.

[DemocratAholic]

22. I didn't really understand it until recently

I'm relatively new here, and I didn't really understand this rec/unrec stuff until rather recently when I noticed my posts would go up and down as far as the rec number. My own impression is it represents more of an "I agree with what you are saying" versus a "I disagree." What I find slightly amusing is when people make a point of saying they are "unrecommendeding" a post. Ouch. No, I personally don't like it. It kind of reminds me of high school and the popular kids versus the unpopular kids. If it were up to me I would probably keep the recommend, but do away with the unrecommend. While I am browsing through the posts, I don't pay any attention to the rec number to determine what I am going to read, I only look at the subject. Having said that, I have unrecommended a couple of posts, the only reason was I didn't think them worthy of reading no matter what your opinion whether you would agree or not. Things I found offensive or along those lines. By the way, is "unrecommend" a real word? My spell checker is telling me no.

[Heidi]

25. No. (nt)

[salvorhardin]

26. Gauging by the seemingly endless stream of rec/unrec button navel gazing threads...

I would say no, no it doesn't.

[MineralMan]

27. Unrecommended, because it doesn't matter.

Posts either get discussed or they do not. The number of recommendations or their opposite have nothing to do with whether the post is discussed or not.

Personally, I do not pay any attention to the number of recommendations for any original post I make. They seem irrelevant to the number of replies and replies to those replies. It just doesn't matter. Sometimes, I'll make a post and it gets almost no discussion at all. Other times, one of my OPs gets hundreds of posts attached to it. I could tell you why that was for each post. It never has anything to do with the rec count. That's a different matter, and is only relevant to the Greatest Page and the Top Ten page. Few people use those to find posts they want to read in the first place.

It does not matter, and has been over-discussed here.

[defendandprotect]

31. Think we are seeing huge numbers of articles every day which leave me time ...

merely to scan quickly and "k/r" -- and though I try to get back to

the article, often I don't because of time limits.

The "UN" imo has kept many good articles down -- and is permitting

articles of lesser quality to rise --

Overall the quality and timeliness of articles being posted has fallen --

beginning in last two years --

[snooper2]

60. D&P

come on..

You know they last forever in your Favorites! :hi:

[Upton]

32. Unreccomended...heard it all before

and the answer to your question is NO.

[madinmaryland]

49. Scary, but I agree with you on this, Upton. BTW, no SF49er avatar??

[cbdo2007]

33. Am I the only one here who doesn't even look at the number of Recs a post has??

I just click on interesting topics and don't pay one bit of attention to the number of recommends.

I'm not even sure of the point of them because they really don't say anything. You can have posts that say "Obama is great" with 50 recs or you could have a post that says "Obama is great" with no recs. Doesn't matter, it just depends on who happens to be reading DU that day.

[reflection]

36. No, you're not the only one.

I could care less about recs and unrecs. I read thread titles and decide on my own what I want to partake in. Don't need to know what the cool kids are doing.

[Arkansas Granny]

37. No, you aren't the only one. I rarely check out the greatest page, either.

[Stinky The Clown]

50. I understand that many poeple feel as you do. But that misses the point of the OP

The OP asked in the rec/unrec system has lowered the level of actual discussion overall. Not for any one person, but for the community, overall.

[reflection]

34. I think it may actually reduce squabbling.

And I'm all for anything that does that. Now instead of "nyah nyah you're a poopy-pants" someone can just hit unrec and keep rolling.

[Arkansas Granny]

35. I can't remember for sure, but wasn't there a limit, at one time, on how

many recommends that a poster could give in one day's time?

[madinmaryland]

38. Awww, Jeez....

Un-reccing for whining about the rec function.

[Stinky The Clown]

52. Pardon me

Where was the whine in the OP?

I musta missed that when i carefully considered how to be sure to leave it out, even for projectionists.

Here. Now calm down.

[MineralMan]

39. The rec/unrec system has deteriorated into a useless feature.

It's now just a You Rock!/You Suck! button, for the most part. Many people use it to support or oppose the person who created the original post - often without even reading the post. To the extent that happens, it is a silly feature, and I think it happens to a very, very large extent. That makes it even less worth noticing that it was in the past.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. ^^^ for some ^^^^

[uppityperson]

40. I don't care about it one way or the other, it doesn't influence what i read but I understand those

for whom it does, who go to "greatest" to see what is there.

[MineralMan]

41. Dupe

Phooey!

[originalpckelly]

42. Maybe they could should show both recs and unrecs?

How hard would it be to add another column with a negative number in it showing the number of unrecs? This would more accurately show the nature of a thread, as right now it is theoretically possible for a thread to have 300 recs and 300 unreacs and we'd never really know. It just cancels out.

Lately DU has been very divided. Perhaps this division is a time where the rec system is showing its flaws.

[deaniac21]

44. I would say that most DUer's don't spend even one second a

day thinking about it.

[MrScorpio]

45. Rec/Unrec is not the problem

It's all of the incessant badgering by all of the "true believers".

Pity the poor person who strays away from the popular meme of the day.

[pipi_k]

48. I don't. Even if they didn't exist...

there's still the issue of people posting stuff like

"+1"

or "[phone]!!!!"

and there's no discussion.


Then there's the snarky one-line comment followed by "n/t"

Again, no discussion.


Neither of these succeeds in sparking a whole lot of discussion, as far as I can tell...

[spanone]

51. it's the anonymous neener

[SoCalDem]

53. I like "views" and was thrilled to see that feature, BUT

I absolutely loathe rec-unrec.

I have been here since June 2001, so I'm a real "oldtimer", and I miss the "discussion" part most of all..


A drive-by , silent unrec...or a K&R:kick: will never take the place of a well-thought-out response.

It also cuts down on the effort that many may make.. I mean, why spend time researching something, time trying to ferret out all the typos & oopsies, only to look at responses that are mostly K&R:kick: or 300 views+ 6 replies & multiple silent un-recs.

The naysayers will say.."Hey, don't be so thin-skinned..it's no biggie"...just like when a republicasn blowhard says "DemocRAT party"..it's no biggie...and that IS true, but if you liked to hang out here for the cyber-conversation once, that is not the case anymore for many of us oldtimers.

The whole "but we don't want stuff like THAT, showing up on the front page" argument's a bit flimsy too, because we DO have moderators...and who is "we" , anyway. Is there some silent/invisible "Front Page Squad" whose sworn duty is to censor by un-rec, just so that their tastes are upheld at all costs?.. This reminds me a lot of the "text-book people" down in Texas who pore over every word in the books just so they can ban the ones they don't like.

And of course the sneaky aspect of it all is annoying, if not all that important..I'm sure than many unrec addicts must have a stenopad at the ready so they can record usernames they "don't like", and so that they never miss a cyber-opportunity to
"show" them..

Whatever floats your boat..but it's taken this site to a level of "petty" that I never wanted to see.

[Stinky The Clown]

55. I'm really glad to see someone else who gets it.

It isn't about how many recs or unrecs, per se. It is about the notion of using them in lieu of thoughtful discussion. I dare say, from the time of my joining in 2004 to maybe late 2006 or maybe 2007, there really was some level of intelligent discussion.

Then the length of OPs got smaller because it became clearer each day that long posts never got read and really good, meaty, thoughtful, researched, original writing sunk like a stone while much shorter, often incendiary or snarky threads got many more comments - and recs or unrecs. Soon enough, the number of recs was often inversely proportional to the number of comments of any sort.

I will absolutely own the authorship of the new, increasingly popular "short form" post - often obnoxious - as described above. It keeps the board moving. The few times I put more serious thought into a post I was rewarded with nothing. Often zero comments. That could be the result of crappy writing, sure, but it happens to plenty of others, too.

And so one learns. One adapts. The community wants pop tarts, not hearty, slow cooked oatmeal. So they get pop tarts.

The pop tarts will sustain for quite a while, I suppose.

[snooper2]

58. you ever see a narwhal give birth?

[Matariki]

59. No - I think it's because uncontroversial posts don't garner replies.

When people agree with something and there's nothing to add to the OP, the posts tend to sink. Unfortunately those are often the most worthy posts. Compare to something contentious that stays at the top of the discussion for days.

I wish a 'rec' would also serve as a post kick.

[snooper2]

63. Negative..

You get can get a much better response by posting random pictures..that are not controversial

Like..

[Iggo]

61. Nope.

[Blue-Jay]

62. Jesus was a space alien.

[cherokeeprogressive]

64. 600+ views and 64 responses as I type this. I'd say the answer is no.

I read GD, GD;P, The Lounge, and the Dungeon. Oh, and the Sports forum too. Can't remember the last time I looked at the Greatest Page. As someone said upthread, and I totally agree, the Greatest Page is for the rest of the herd.

It's the last thing I look at when reading thread titles and deciding which ones to open up to read. Check that. I don't look at it at all.

[Stinky The Clown]

66. The OP didn't ask about "you". It asked the question far more broadly.

You made it about "you" and "your" reading habits. That's just anecdotal and of little value. While you do what you do (and what you do is perfectly fine), what do you think the rec/unrec feature does for discussion among the larger community?






I also note that you've weighed in at several points in this thread, so clearly it is of interest to you.