|
-
-
migmel
- Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 11:59a 
Well i dont' post often...mostly due to the fact that the deals i find are usually already posted...but can i say that changing an entire system that works is just not a good thing to do. I have already wasted too much time reading crap on page one now...Anyone ever see dave chapell skit "if the internet was a real place" That's how I feel....there is no buffer now. Oh and the "spamming" has already started....free this free that....there are many like me...ie newbs with a low post count but the point is....this irks me enough to post...
Thanks.
can we also have a better explanation then the one provided? |
-
-
Wolfkin
- Cranky Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 11:59a
nunaliorte said:As I'm sure you've noticed, there have been some changes to the ratings system.
Previous uses of negative voting, and what you should do now:
spam, repost, wrong forum --> send in a moderator alert
poor title, missing information --> reply with helpful suggestions to the poster
don't like the deal? --> walk on by, not much value in replying and bumping a crappy dealWhile I'm sure there were people who tried to abuse the neg rating I find it hard to believe that it cause this much trouble communially. This however will. While the first and third option are viable and actually more correct than neg rating the second option is unexcusable. That will not work. Numerous times I'm sure the OP turns of PMs and does not subscribe to his/her thread. Complaints will only do so much so if it stays we'll adapt but the negative rating is a highly important self-moderation tool of the community that will be sorely missed. |
-
-
footn200 (Staff)
- X - Mod
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 11:59a
It's fair to say this is a work in progress... and we're listening (as we did to develop it in the first place).
We are certainly committed to the best experience possible no matter what it is, so please give it a try and continue with the feedback. |
-
-
migmel
- Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 11:59a
Well i dont' post often...mostly due to the fact that the deals i find are usually already posted...but can i say that changing an entire system that works is just not a good thing to do. I have already wasted too much time reading crap on page one now...Anyone ever see dave chapell skit "if the internet was a real place" That's how I feel....there is no buffer now. Oh and the "spamming" has already started....free this free that....there are many like me...ie newbs with a low post count but the point is....this irks me enough to post...
Thanks.
can we also have a better explanation then the one provided? |
-
-
MechanicalMan
- Senior Member - 3K
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:00p
GlassVial said:There's quite a few voting abusers that should be/should have been banned. I've alerted the mods several times about the threadcrappers that he mentioned, and nothing ever came of it. Hopefully taking away their 'negging' power will give them incentive to kindly F off 
Removing negative ratings and pissing off 99% of the people who use this site is not the way to handle that problem. |
-
-
GlassVial
- Senior Member - 7K
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:01p
footn200 said:It's fair to say this is a work in progress... and we're listening (as we did to develop it in the first place).
We are certainly committed to the best experience possible no matter what it is, so please give it a try and continue with the feedback.
Here's some feedback for you: next time someone alerts the mods 3 or more times of a voting abuser, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!! OK?  |
-
-
Canucklehead
- Broke Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:01p
LAME!!! LAME !! LAME!! LAME!! LAME!! oh.... and this is LAME!!!
So when did the site move to Cuba? Why else would a communist regime change the way of the people... Perhaps a referendum would have been better.... oh wait... this is America... where the will of the few outweigh the outrage of the many... |
-
-
Ivanist
- Senior Member - 6K
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:01p
fish777 said:I see a problem in this kind of rating system.
Obviously not everyone know what price is hot for certain item. And people in FW vote on item when they don't even closely keeping track of the price (or recent deal) of that item.
For example, a lot of people vote positive just for the effort (like those Amazon Friday deal post) instead of real Deal in the post.
If the price is not hot, even if 10 persons vote green because they think it is hot (or just thank for the effect), usually there will be enough people to counter those vote so the rating is closed to neutral (neither green nor red). This is how rating system supposed to work.
But in this new system, you just need to have 10 friends sign up from school, and come in to vote green, then it will always look like positive (and hot deal). But in fact the price may be just ok.
Making this rating system useless to find out if the deal is good deal or ok deal. Let's say it again, not all member know what price is HOT DEAL and need other FW members that do know the hot deal price to balance out the vote.
I cannot boost your rating! Excellent post by the way!! |
-
-
2she
- Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:02p
clothos1964 said:Well, I swore I wasn't going to post anymore about anything on FW as I get deleted so much it becomes pointless, but instead I'd just lurk, but I have to say this or bust.
I think it would have been better if the threads themselves were left the old way with the ability to have reds and greens ( postive and negative votes) both, as it of course makes it so much easier to skip ( or filter out if you want )the reposts, dead offers, and scams.
HOWEVER, I could certainly live with removing the ability to neg regular posts ( not new threads themselves) as I think the posts added to a thread by others probably should have the voting red flag removed as mostly it's abused by people who take a dislike to a certain member or members and just neg red vote ALL their comments as a means to be nasty and annoy the poster.
Just my opinion, mind you. But no red voting on a thread itself just leaves people wasting way too much time weeding through caca to get to the new or verified good stuff.
Just my opinion, mind you.
I meant to say the same thing ... I think this is the way to go because replies don't really need voting. Any additional info should be posted in the OP. If a member really wants credit for bringing additional info to an OP, they could put their name, if they so desire ... |
-
-
Canucklehead
- Broke Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:02p
Canucklehead said:LAME!!! LAME !! LAME!! LAME!! LAME!! oh.... and this is LAME!!!
So when did the site move to Cuba? Why else would a communist regime change the way of the people... Perhaps a referendum would have been better.... oh wait... this is America... where the will of the few outweigh the outrage of the many...
Can I requote myself over and over!!??? |
-
-
MechanicalMan
- Senior Member - 3K
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:03p
footn200 said:It's fair to say this is a work in progress... and we're listening (as we did to develop it in the first place).
A lot of this was already discussed when you removed the ability to rate replies. Did you guys already forget that feedback? I don't remember that being a very popular change. |
-
-
userid
- Senior Member - 1K
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:03p
Should we change the rating color to something else (Blue?) since red/green go hand in hand. |
-
-
TannerP
- Addicted Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:03p
-
-
Canucklehead
- Broke Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:04p
-
-
jason745
- Thrifty Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:04p
footn200 said:It's fair to say this is a work in progress... and we're listening (as we did to develop it in the first place).
We are certainly committed to the best experience possible no matter what it is, so please give it a try and continue with the feedback.
The link to this thread is a perfect example of why this sucks.
5 people have boosted it to green and there is no way to counter those votes to show disapproval of the thread. So now one must assume it's a great deal/thread. |
-
-
tr00p
- Ancient Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:04p
Suggestion to accomplish a similar thing without completely destroying our ability to filter deals and poor posts:
Reduce the weight of negative posts and decrease the rating required to fit into the message filter.
By the way, my filter has always been All Messages. Like many others, I rely on the visual cues to help me quickly navigate deals and the many posts that inhabit popular threads. |
-
-
SpinDizzy
- Senior Member - 5K
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:04p
footn200 said:It's fair to say this is a work in progress... and we're listening (as we did to develop it in the first place).
We are certainly committed to the best experience possible no matter what it is, so please give it a try and continue with the feedback.
who, when, where did you listen to anyone ever say that the ability to neg a post should be taken away? i seriously don't recall eer reading anyone say that... at least not a gross majority of users that's for sure. |
-
-
enterkey
- Broke Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:04p
Maybe we can hit a compromise...
Like give ability to give negative rating to a person, only if s/he comments on that post, but anyone can "boost" a post...? That way, maybe there won't be a negative post without reasoning.
Just throwing in some idea. I HATE taking red away completely. |
-
-
germanpope
- Frivolous Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:04p
ok --- here is suggestion --- keep the red --- but allow users to click on the rating on a post and find out who left the feedback (that way a red post could easily be examined to see if the red is legit or just spite (which most are)--- this would require some website tweaking (and work) --- |
-
-
chocula
- Broke Member
posted: Sep. 13, 2006 @ 12:05p
but there is no longer any negative voting
Great idea. A bunch of posts would get a neg because someone did not want the deal or it was not for them. The worst part was when someone would give it a neg AND post in the thread, that would bump it back to the top. If it was so bad, do not bump it, it may just go away.
I never used neg (well, maybe once), because I am glad that people are at least trying to post deals. |
Close
|
|
 |
|
Not Already A Member?
Sign Up Now!
|
|
Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.
|
|
