kronus said:I don't know if anyone's taking the time to read these comments anymore, but I wish everyone's vote counted the same. There's no reason I can think of that some people get 0 votes, and some get +2...
People with a rating power of 0 usually have it for a reason (they had their rating power taken away for abuse). I assume that no one will have +/-2 power soon. FW is still going to make some changes, like putting the "not interested" button back in, and I think that will be one of the changes.

kronus said:I've never abused the ratings, I probably make about 5-10 ratings a day max, some days I don't even rate anything, and a thread has to be a scam or misinformation/bad bad deal for me to rate negative, and I've never had rating "power".
I said usually.
I'm hoping we'll all have +/-1 soon. I tried to ask a mod about it in the HD sticky. Hopefully someone will let us know soon...

couponjohn said:Whats going on with the rating system?
Last night there was nothing this morning it showed some stars , now I look and see nothing, where are we standing on this now?

Oups never mind I see were going back to the old system..

Well its about time!

Good move for us and FW!

Good move, but I am lost now, because the old ratings are gone. I can't differentiate the crappy threads from the valuable ones. I mean, for the new ones I'm able to do this job, but now even the old threads need another scrutiny, since their reds/greens are gone.

nunaliorte said:ruhroh said:What about individual posters too?I think we definitely see the value in a reputation system, the trick would be to implement one that was meaningful and wasn't a (un)popularity contest and the basis of arguments.Other sites allow users to "add" to another person's reputation, but not "subtract" from it. You get a good reputation by people "adding" to it when you post good information. The reputation is independent of a thread or individual post's +/- vote.

ThursdaysChild said:jayK: when you say "that user's posts" do you mean a thread they have started as Original Poster or do you mean the individual's post/messages in reply to a thread?I would think factoring in all the users' posts would be a more accurate indicator.

ruhroh said:footn200 said:
(Still looking into the "not interested" option for individual posts, though.)
What about individual posters too?There are forums that allow you to set up a buddylist of members so you can PM multiple members (the buddies) or to set up an "ignore" list.

Once you set up an "ignore list" the post appears as a blank with the poster's name and a button that allows you to read the post if you change your mind.

That allows forum members to ignore a poster's remarks rather than giving the poster a "red" just for being an individual whose posts you want to ignore.

I have a question about the current system... How come my votes count for little? My negging does NOTHING. e.g. I recently negged a post. Someone else gave it green. The rating was 1. Shouldn't it have been 0?

Is there a good reason why the old thread ratings were wiped out and never reinstalled? I find it extremely annoying that I have to re-rate old threads or expect others to do so, if they have done so before. I can only speak for FW Finance, but you'll find that many of formerly high rated threads with a long history are now (still one month later) rated well below some newer threads, IMO for no other reason than that it would be unreasonable for everyone to revisit and rerate those threads.

If FW can restore the previous ratings of all individual posts, why can't they do this also for thread ratings? Is it a separate system that's not restorable, or were these wiped out and not restored on purpose?