Bring Back the "-1" rating

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

-1 ratings easily lead to situations (in many forums) where people can rate folks down simply because they do not like them; or with a mob mentality at times. I saw the abuse when we had it open.

You mean this post, Charles?

I happen to strongly disagree with that assessment. Personally, even if I dislike someone, I don't comment unless I see them acting up. I think most people are that reasonable. If they aren't, then the Moderators should be dealing with them.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

-1 ratings easily lead to situations (in many forums) where people can rate folks down simply because they do not like them; or with a mob mentality at times. I saw the abuse when we had it open.

But in some cases it is deserved.

[*julez* 124]

ewok's post #288 already answered that question.

See Ewok's post 296, know-it-all. He is willing to try in a more controlled manner.

You only oppose the -1 because it will undoubtedly apply to your posts so frequently.

Edited July 2, 2010 by *julez*

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

See Ewok's post 296, know-it-all. He is willing to try in a more controlled manner.

You only oppose the -1 because it will undoubtedly apply to your posts so frequently.

i guess you'll keep badgering ewok until you get an answer that you like. and you only support it so you can use it in that manner.

[*julez* 124]

Completely false, Charles, as usual.

Now, unless you have something meaningful to add to this discussion, why don't you go post some jpegs and leave the important stuff to the rest of us.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Completely false, Charles, as usual.

Now, unless you have something meaningful to add to this discussion, why don't you go post some jpegs and leave the important stuff to the rest of us.

a month and a half of posts in this thread, totaling over 300 posts, of which you've been a part of since day one, and your continued vitriol towards me proves my earlier points.

[TBoneTX 45,293]

Personally, even if I dislike someone, I don't comment unless I see them acting up. I think most people are that reasonable. If they aren't, then the Moderators should be dealing with them.

This is a mature, circumspect view, si man, but there are just enough "unreasonable" people floating through the K-1 & other fora that some people's perfectly valid advice will be diminished by means of -1 scores. For example, there are several anti-Pushbrk members, and very likely several other anti-someone members. I know of one or maybe two who would think nothing of "dogging" me, woof man.

Perhaps an extra function could be added so that anyone who clicks "-1" would get a second screen that offers options for WHY the rater is clicking -1. This way, patterns of response (overall & by rater) could be determined, rather than operating via guesswork, si man. How does one run a test of something without standards for measurement?

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

This is a mature, circumspect view, si man, but there are just enough "unreasonable" people floating through the K-1 & other fora that some people's perfectly valid advice will be diminished by means of -1 scores. For example, there are several anti-Pushbrk members, and very likely several other anti-someone members. I know of one or maybe two who would think nothing of "dogging" me, woof man.

Perhaps an extra function could be added so that anyone who clicks "-1" would get a second screen that offers options for WHY the rater is clicking -1. This way, patterns of response (overall & by rater) could be determined, rather than operating via guesswork, si man. How does one run a test of something without standards for measurement?

You are assuming people will 'misbehave'.

That is what a test is for. To ascertain whether they will or not.

If there is going to be a test, I propose it be in three forums and not just one. IMO you would get a better overall feel of things. Also you cover more of the membership as people tend to "hang out" wherever they are in the process. In light of that, I would propose the K1, CR1, and AOS forums. I would speculate those forums also have the most traffic.

[ValerieA 350]

This is a mature, circumspect view, si man, but there are just enough "unreasonable" people floating through the K-1 & other fora that some people's perfectly valid advice will be diminished by means of -1 scores. For example, there are several anti-Pushbrk members, and very likely several other anti-someone members. I know of one or maybe two who would think nothing of "dogging" me, woof man.

Perhaps an extra function could be added so that anyone who clicks "-1" would get a second screen that offers options for WHY the rater is clicking -1. This way, patterns of response (overall & by rater) could be determined, rather than operating via guesswork, si man. How does one run a test of something without standards for measurement?

Would one of the options be "Because I think this person is a douchebag"?

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Would one of the options be "Because I think this person is a douchebag"?

Valerie, you're not really helping the case. Even when we see a douchebag, we need to let them act like one first before they get a minus.

[ValerieA 350]

Valerie, you're not really helping the case. Even when we see a douchebag, we need to let them act like one first before they get a minus.

I am all for giving people enough rope to hang themselves.

No, if they provide sound, reasoned advice, I have no problem with them in the upper forums. And most of the ones that are, um, douchebaggy, are only that way in OT, so it doesn't count. I have found them very helpful regarding actual immigration stuff.

[*julez* 124]

a month and a half of posts in this thread, totaling over 300 posts, of which you've been a part of since day one, and your continued vitriol towards me proves my earlier points.

I'm not interested in your points. I have openly admitted I have absolutely no respect for you. If you don't want to hear what I have to say then please, do not directly address me any more.

[Darnell 8,478]

If there is going to be a test, I propose it be in three forums and not just one. IMO you would get a better overall feel of things. Also you cover more of the membership as people tend to "hang out" wherever they are in the process. In light of that, I would propose the K1, CR1, and AOS forums. I would speculate those forums also have the most traffic.

I agree with this.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I'm not interested in your points. I have openly admitted I have absolutely no respect for you. If you don't want to hear what I have to say then please, do not directly address me any more.

that could be a two way street, you know?

[Krikit 1,164]

I'd like the -1 test in multiple forums also. And maybe throw in a random non-immigration forum as a litmus test.