Abuse on the rating system

[Absolutelee]

As a non-voting member, I agree with Richard that this is bound to happen in the off season. I just don't click on driver threads, but then again I'm more of a consumer than a poster

[Steven]

Mods: Maybe it would be better to change the +1 and +1 icons for "useful" and "not helpful" or similar icons?

Very open to suggestions there, but I cannot immediately think of an obvious small icon that suggests "quality post" vs "useless".

And the rating, it shows how 'good' an topic is. It isnt really a good number to give it that view. I mean the Ferrari F2012 has like 40000 posts in it, and a rating of like 95. According to that, the F2012 topic would be of better quality than a topic of 5 posts and a rating of 5, because 95 is higher than 5.
A better way to show a topics rating is the avarage rating per post. so for the Ferrari topic that would be 95/40000=0.002375 Then of the other topic that would be 5/5=1 That in turn would give a much better indication in my opinion.

That was suggested before and was also one of the possibilities to implement before introducing the system. It can still be fairly easily changed. However, avg post ratings will results in a much lower thread rating, so maybe we should find some other way then. In any case, it should be obvious at first, or at the very latest at second sight. Again, more suggestions welcome!

... I only use the rating at a user, it gives a much better indication on whether or not the user is a 'good' user, because a user with a higher rating has made more quality posts.

Indeed, one of the complaints of the old ranks system was that people with high number of posts were not necessarily valuable to the forum, whereas the current value should be much more correct.

[hollus]

That's a tricky one. The pages would get a bit large, but I wonder if this has a copyright?



Or, to make it a bit more technical (minus the small text):



Luckily for me, there is no downvote button in this thread!

[krisfx]

I was voted down in the karting thread, because I tried to steer the thread back on topic as it became flooded with V8 Supercar chatter, completely unrelated and in my opinion useless!

Hey ho, though peer voting systems will never be 100% accurate.

[Caito]

I believe total rating is still better than average for a simple reason. There's more "read-worthy" material in the 95 vote than in the 5. Though that 95 posts may be scattered around.

[Jersey Tom]

Not that I really care one way or the other, but it is pretty hilarious that someone dug up a 4 year old post of mine to downvote, in a thread that's not even active.

Haters gonna hate!

[Caito]

I think it's working fine, since you can see that the users that contribute the most (at least in my opinion) have the most votes.

But I must admite I normally do not visit the car section.

[wesley123]

I believe total rating is still better than average for a simple reason. There's more "read-worthy" material in the 95 vote than in the 5. Though that 95 posts may be scattered around.

That is sure the case, but I dont think anyone wants to, or is going to read through 14000 posts full of crap just to read those 95 useful posts.

Something might be useful that users can rate threads, with 1 to 5 stars. And that will be displayed together with the overall rating. Then it gives a suggestion of how much useful posts there are, and how useful the thread actually is.

Not that I really care one way or the other, but it is pretty hilarious that someone dug up a 4 year old post of mine to downvote, in a thread that's not even active.

Haters gonna hate!

imo a post should be locked from voting after 1-2 years. Since then such post is made we have all moved on to different things or have the same subject discussed much further. For people who then want to dig up old stuff they can go through what was good then, and not something that has changed over the past.

Imo it is similar as rating a 1960's NASA document as crap because it was worse than it is now, because then we knew less. And so it is with discussions, 2 years ago when the post was made we knew less of the subject than that it is now.

[Steven]

imo a post should be locked from voting after 1-2 years. Since then such post is made we have all moved on to different things or have the same subject discussed much further. For people who then want to dig up old stuff they can go through what was good then, and not something that has changed over the past.

Imo it is similar as rating a 1960's NASA document as crap because it was worse than it is now, because then we knew less. And so it is with discussions, 2 years ago when the post was made we knew less of the subject than that it is now.

It had crossed my mind as well, but I was personally thinking of only preventing downvotes, but possibly after a much shorter time after the post was made.

[Nando]

Wesley, it takes 25 rep points to gain the ability to downvote, currently there is bug that makes it need 26, but in any case, you will soon be there.

Thanks, now i know why i´m getting random downvotes throughout the forums when i get close to that number.

24 is the highest i´ve gone...

And to the OP, yes the system is being abused like crazy....
It´s absolutely ridiculous frankly.

Proof of the psychopath in work,

Not that I really care one way or the other, but it is pretty hilarious that someone dug up a 4 year old post of mine to downvote, in a thread that's not even active.

Haters gonna hate!

edit: and some more today i see. don´t be scared homie, eventually we will even the playing field...

[Raptor22]

Not that I really care one way or the other, but it is pretty hilarious that someone dug up a 4 year old post of mine to downvote, in a thread that's not even active.

Haters gonna hate!

or cases where a post is made and people then upvote it and the mod decides he doesn't like and deletes it. Surely if the post is voted on its relevant and only a down vote deserves deletion...
even mods can abuse their own system

[mx_tifoso]

Raptor, you'd be surprised to see with what frequency posts are upvoted without a legitimate reason. So we may have special cases where someone was fooling around and upvoted a post in the Caption Competition, hardly a technical or insightful topic, and we had to step in.

It's most definitely not about us "disliking" a post and then taking action on that feeling, so please don't make us out to be something we're not.

And something that the moderation team has repeated several times since the introduction of the system is if you don't like your rating it's within your grasp to change that by updating the content of your posts to either reduce the tomfoolery or increase the informational factor. Blaming others for shortcomings isn't a good characteristic.

[wunderkind]

I agree, haters gonna hate.

There were two or three rather obnoxious characters on all the Mercedes-AMG GP threads last year who up-voted among themselves and downvoted any posts they didnt like.

[Nando]

Letting everyone downvote that has the ability to upvote would dramatically change the landscape.

[Dragonfly]

Raptor, you'd be surprised to see with what frequency posts are upvoted without a legitimate reason. So we may have special cases where someone was fooling around and upvoted a post in the Caption Competition, hardly a technical or insightful topic, and we had to step in.

It's most definitely not about us "disliking" a post and then taking action on that feeling, so please don't make us out to be something we're not.

And something that the moderation team has repeated several times since the introduction of the system is if you don't like your rating it's within your grasp to change that by updating the content of your posts to either reduce the tomfoolery or increase the informational factor. Blaming others for shortcomings isn't a good characteristic.

With all due respect this is the typical reaction of every administration, no matter the level and scale - strong unwillingness to admit own errors. You seem to somehow think that everyone here is striving for points and votes. Which is not the case.
I don't care. And I am sure there many like me. I visit the forum every day with rare exceptions. Don't write much, only when I feel there's something to write.
The whole voting system is a kindergarten play and in its current state (with some exceptions) an indicator for the most active spammers and/or team/driver partisans.
A handful of people do actually contribute to the technical merits of this forum and I owe them an apology because I usually forget to upvote their posts, since the voting system is out of my interest.