Eliminate negative voting

Well I don't know if that's entirely fair Hawkeye because Craven isn't putting a value on the merit of a thread based on the numbers and he doesn't see the numbers as anything that should be a problem. They aren't a problem for him.

They aren't a problem for us either in any way other than possibly being discouraged a bit in generating interest in an interesting thread.

I don't really care one way or another any more re approval ratings. I get a lot of my posts voted down because I'm me and not because there is anything ad hominem or offensive in them because there isn't. But the kiddies will play as it were and since I have a pretty good idea who does it, it doesn't bother me. Now with PMs back they can start (and I suspect are) organizing such efforts better and we'll just have to see if that will make a difference. If the site becomes too unpleasant or isn't fun, I'll leave. Right now it isn't too unpleasant and I am still enjoying myself.

For me it is a personal preference to be able to set a thread aside without any appearance of attaching a negative connotation to that.

It's simple enough for even a 5 year old to understand Hawkeye. The voting system is there to allow the community to self-regulate and it does that. However, the overwhelming majority of the claims that the system is making topics less visible have not been true, and have typically been cases with only a few downvotes and no change to the topic's visibility.

This is the first time that Gunga has bitched about the new system--the last time was a prolonged bitch about how threads are tagged. Essentially, Gunga is complaining that he don't get no respect. But this thread now has ten "thumbs-up" votes. The thread he was complaining about initially is still visible to everyone except those few who voted it down so that it would no longer appear on their "new posts" listing. I don't happen to use the voting system, but i can see why others would do so. Gunga starts a lot of threads which other people consider ridiculous, so he may not get the respect he thinks he merits. But that does not alter the obvious fact, as this thread demonstrates, that people do read his threads, they do respond to them, and people do vote favorably for threads he starts. It is incredible to me how much bitching there has been about this new system. I'd say it works pretty well. So far, the complaints that i've seen about the system somehow not working have been whining which misses the point of the system, and which is petty complaining that everything is not just so. You can please some of the people some of the time . . .

Letty, I wonder if part of why you are finding the ratings problematic is that you DO view down votes as being negative feedback, when there is no reason to believe that is what they are.


They MIGHT be...that is, someone may read your pieces and give them a thumbs down because they do not like them.

However, it is WAY more likely that they are not interested in actually reading any creative writing, and they give a thumbs down simply so that the thread in which you have placed your writing will disappear for them.

Thus, the votes likely simply mean that people do not wish to read your pieces, rather than they they have read them and disliked them, and have chosen to indicate this without giving feedback.


I know the whole thumbs down thing FEELS as though someone is indicating dislike of us, or our work, or our comments.....(that's just the cultural baggage the thumbs down symbol, and ratings systems generally, carry with them)...and it is hard not to cringe and crumple a bit. I know I do.

But I really do NOT think that is what they generally mean in relation to your writing.


Do you think you have really "got" the distinction?

Well, of course you have, and I am likely being insulting by asking if you have.

But I do hate to see you feeling something about this that I just don't think is true.

Poetry is betterer at being worserer than prose knows how to be on the nose.

Vogonic! Perfect adjective.

(Yes, I don't really wish to return to the days when I scrounged and scrounged for a comment that would be both true and somewhat encouraging.)

Have you been drinking this evening, Miss Wabbit?

No.

Nooooo! You forgot the line breaks! Line breaks are the most important thing in poetry. You needn't make sense; you don't need no rhyme or rhythm; but never, never forget the line breaks. Your writing is simply not poetry without them. Like so:

Poetry is betterer
at
being worserer
than prose knows
how
to be on the
nose.

See? That is poetry. Huge difference. It's all about the line breaks.

Well:

a. Mine is uber-superior post-modern deconstructivist poetry, which plays with wit and charm upon the convention of the line break and, in fact, both CONTAINS implicit line-breaks, and breaks the CONSTRAINTS of these, whilst forcing the reader to create their own.

So, like, thanks for both illustrating and ruining my
poem
you beast

b. I'll show you from breaks
and
they may not
be
in a line.

Wrong reaction!
Not
Defensive enough.

Whimpers