How is the forum rating system doing?

[Kiril Varbanov]

The more I'm looking at the system, I see that downvotes are just fight-provoking feature. In my personal opinion, I don't need the -1 - I can easily spot troll, stupid person or someone who I just dislike. I also have mental 'ignore' function, so I don't really need the -1. I can't agree that expressing opinion should be punished.

On the other hand, if we continue to have the +1, it drives a more positive attitude towards the whole forum and discussion thing. Making a good argument on a certain point should be enough to convince the person. Yet, if he's a stub, there's not much point in talking to him. When was the last time you won an argument with the radio?

[GitanesBlondes]

The more I'm looking at the system, I see that downvotes are just fight-provoking feature. In my personal opinion, I don't need the -1 - I can easily spot troll, stupid person or someone who I just dislike. I also have mental 'ignore' function, so I don't really need the -1. I can't agree that expressing opinion should be punished.

On the other hand, if we continue to have the +1, it drives a more positive attitude towards the whole forum and discussion thing. Making a good argument on a certain point should be enough to convince the person. Yet, if he's a stub, there's not much point in talking to him. When was the last time you won an argument with the radio?

Even if I had the ability to downvote, I can't say I would make much, if any use of it. Why? I don't see the point. It's a way for posters to be passive-aggressive for their own personal vendettas. If the whole thing were public, I suspect you wouldn't see anyone downvoting all that much because then it'd look a little too obvious that they can't handle differing opinions.

I think the downvoting aspect should just be taken away altogether. Leave the upvoting because I do think it encourages positive thought whereas the downvoting just encourages bad behavior on the part of the downvoter.

[turbof1]

I feel like the downvoting is safeguard for quality at this forums. Generally it succeeds in that. It puts a bit of pressure to not be a moron and not to make trolling, mockering or idiotic comments in general. The presence alone of such a system is very often more then enough to keep conversations constructive. Because it is anonymous, it can't be considered fight provoking, because being the downvoted one, you can only guess who downvoted you. It acts, again in general, as a tool for members to act when things go very much sideways, so that the situation can be partly solved before the moderator gets a chance to step in. For example a post which has -2 is hidden, with the option to unhide it, so that it doesn't disturb the discussion as much. I haven't seen any -2 post yet which was unfairly judged, so the system does seem to work flawlessly in that aspect and effectively evades fights instead of provoking them.

However, anonymity should have boundaries. If -1's are given on personal reasons, and not on content, then the disadvantaged one should have the right to know who is troubling him. anonymity stops being a precaution to evade fights and starts being a shield for bullies when ill intent plays into it.

Abuse or "quick to push" behavior is difficult to rule out, but could be minimized.

[GitanesBlondes]

I feel like the downvoting is safeguard for quality at this forums. Generally it succeeds in that. It puts a bit of pressure to not be a moron and not to make trolling, mockering or idiotic comments in general. The presence alone of such a system is very often more then enough to keep conversations constructive. Because it is anonymous, it can't be considered fight provoking, because being the downvoted one, you can only guess who downvoted you. It acts, again in general, as a tool for members to act when things go very much sideways, so that the situation can be partly solved before the moderator gets a chance to step in. For example a post which has -2 is hidden, with the option to unhide it, so that it doesn't disturb the discussion as much. I haven't seen any -2 post yet which was unfairly judged, so the system does seem to work flawlessly in that aspect and effectively evades fights instead of provoking them.

However, anonymity should have boundaries. If -1's are given on personal reasons, and not on content, then the disadvantaged one should have the right to know who is troubling him. anonymity stops being a precaution to evade fights and starts being a shield for bullies when ill intent plays into it.

Abuse or "quick to push" behavior is difficult to rule out, but could be minimized.

I was downvoted for posting a topic with a link to a paper on BMW's F1 engines.

Does anyone see the stupidity in this?

I even made a post that stated that with tarmac runoff at Tamburello, Senna may still have died, and that at the very least, they should have had a tire barrier up in those days. Yet I was downvoted for that?

[Holm86]

i don't think the rating system is working that well either. People use downvotes just because they dont agree. I thought downvoting was supposed to be is a thread didnt have any usefulness.

I even contacted the admins over the 2014 engine thread where i thought that anybody just downvoted the people they didnt like or agree with. But no response from the admins.

[bhall]

The absurd number under my name is indefatigable proof that the rating system is screwy.

[GitanesBlondes]

i don't think the rating system is working that well either. People use downvotes just because they dont agree. I thought downvoting was supposed to be is a thread didnt have any usefulness.

I even contacted the admins over the 2014 engine thread where i thought that anybody just downvoted the people they didnt like or agree with. But no response from the admins.

Well, I think some people get tired of being talked down to by a professed know-it-all in that 2014 engine topic?

But yes, the downvoting is done just because someone does not agree with something someone says even if it is purely subjective. Discussion does involve subjective viewpoints at times, and such things cannot really be labeled as right or wrong.

I upvote posts that I think have useful information on any subject, even if it could be termed subjective. Downvoting here is purely a tool used by some when they get angry that someone has a differing opinion on things.

[GitanesBlondes]

The absurd number under my name is indefatigable proof that the rating system is screwy.

Well, I've not read every single post you have been upvoted for, but you've made some rather good posts...I feel anyway.

At least they don't venture into discussing body fat percentages.

[Kiril Varbanov]

The absurd number under my name is indefatigable proof that the rating system is screwy.

That number is certainly here to tell something. 184 is a cool one. That's price of a single liter of fuel in Bulgaria. Joking aside (or not really), I continue to support the positive-only pathway. Sort of like Facebook like feature (I can smell the napalm on my inbox right now for just mentioning Facebook ) - just like it and advance. Don't even count it. Let the user know that the someone, Kiril for example, likes his post, and that's it. It gives the feeling of appreciation, but it's not obligatory and it doesn't create the number burden that you are aiming at. One-way "I like that cool|informative|agree-able|funny post".
We can keep a badge hidden upon a profile click for the old ratings? Or something similar.

Improper posts are dealt with timely by mods anyway.

[Holm86]

I wrote something in the endurance racing thread. Which first got a +1. Then a -1. But i recon someone doesnt like seeing upvotes go to some people.

[GitanesBlondes]

I wrote something in the endurance racing thread. Which first got a +1. Then a -1. But i recon someone doesnt like seeing upvotes go to some people.

That's always been my thought, which is why I think it lends credence to the idea that there are some with downvoting capabilities that think this forum is their personal fiefdom. A shame really as it's juvenile behavior at best, and vindictive at worst.

[hollus]

I maintain my opinion that while being imperfect, the voting system is going a fine job overall. Mass votes are coming now, or at least it is possible now with 670ish members being able to upvote and 71 members having downvoting rights. Single +1s and -1s will necessarily be noisy and somewhat random and ofter cancel each other...

A little glitch that comes with it and with the fact that different people have different opinions on what type of positive qualities should be upvoted:

After this pic in the F138 thread,

came this answer:

Lots of flo vis on the bear - must be a 2014 part

Funny as hell, and it gathered a +4 rep rather quickly. Not that I am too worried about a very funny post gathering votes, but it goes to show that some people will upvote insight, others, like me, things with hard data and explicit numbers / calculations, others opinions and in this case, and we'll see more and more of this, funny. Being funny is the ultimate quality to have in the internet, isn't it?

[GitanesBlondes]

I maintain my opinion that while being imperfect, the voting system is going a fine job overall. Mass votes are coming now, or at least it is possible now with 670ish members being able to upvote and 71 members having downvoting rights. Single +1s and -1s will necessarily be noisy and somewhat random and ofter cancel each other...

I find it works just fine so long as people aren't doing downvotes to act out personal vendettas, or are mad that someone holds an opinion contrary to their own, which is a large problem here.

[Tim.Wright]

I've mentioned this before, but I've found the downvotes to be a very useful tool because I've seen a perfect correlation between people with negative ratings and people who are a waste of time arguing with.

A few controversial suggestions:

1. Race threads and driver threads should only have a downvote button (at least trial it for one race Tomba!)

2. Then there needs to be actual consequences of a negative rating for it to have any effect. Given the robustness of the downvote, there should be an automatic 1 month ban if you go over a certain downvote/time density. Every time you get banned, the threshold for the next banning gets halved.

There are a lot of people who hang around only in the driver and race threads (and the god awful live race chat) and F1T would honestly be a better place without them.

[GitanesBlondes]

I've mentioned this before, but I've found the downvotes to be a very useful tool because I've seen a perfect correlation between people with negative ratings and people who are a waste of time arguing with.

A few controversial suggestions:

1. Race threads and driver threads should only have a downvote button (at least trial it for one race Tomba!)

2. Then there needs to be actual consequences of a negative rating for it to have any effect. Given the robustness of the downvote, there should be an automatic 1 month ban if you go over a certain downvote/time density. Every time you get banned, the threshold for the next banning gets halved.

There are a lot of people who hang around only in the driver and race threads (and the god awful live race chat) and F1T would honestly be a better place without them.

Tim,

The problem with that approach is that there are people with enough votes to downvote that do so out of spite.

That in turn is a problem with suggestion 2 where certain members would no doubt target other members they do not like so they can get them banned for a period of time. Downvoting works assuming people have no bias, however that is impossible as everyone has bias. It's just a matter of to what extreme the bias goes.

While you may have seen a perfect correlation between people with negative ratings, I have not entirely. Some of it comes from the particular segment you reference that pollutes the forum with driver threads, and the constant arguing that goes on in the race threads. However, I've also seen numerous topics where a factual post was made, but because it wasn't liked --no doubt due to thin skin some here have-- and promptly received a downvote for no rational reason. Not everyone is going share the same opinions on many various subjects as I have said previously. However that is not a license to start trying to punish people for how they see things if it does not match your own views identically.