40 replies to this topic

[TheFountain]

I also like to see the feature where the top 2 voted positive posts are placed on TOP (as shadows). This lets readers see the most valuable contributions right away instead of going through a long reading of not only bad posts but non-essential contributions.

For example, there's a thread on Leucine restriction. You'd have to scroll down the page to read the most valuable reply. It would be nice if that post has a 'ghost' version posted right on the top as first reply to the original post.

I think that feature would be very useful.

^^^^ Disagree 1000%

What if the most 'valuable' posts are only made so by those who partake of the voting system, whereas equally valuable opposing research is rendered at the bottom of the page, where people such as yourself, would not be inclined to look?

Again, who decides what is 'valuable'? And do votes constitute this distinction really? On a forum where a lot of people still do not use the rating system? Also what if these 'most valuable' of posts are replies to other, very crucial posts, which have not gotten any votes? It sort of takes it out of context.

But hey, if you want to let other people decide what is most 'valuable' for you, good luck.

[caliban]

Right now, if you want to ignore a poster, you'd just have to do it manually, by ignoring the guy, by just skipping / scrolling past down his post.

Again, you can select to hide/fold post below a certain threshold (bottom of a thread) and you can choose to ignore users entirely.

[Forever21]

Right now, if you want to ignore a poster, you'd just have to do it manually, by ignoring the guy, by just skipping / scrolling past down his post.

Again, you can select to hide/fold post below a certain threshold (bottom of a thread) and you can choose to ignore users entirely.

Oh wow. I wasn't aware of those cool features. Thanks for sharing. I'm glad that you guys agree with my feature ideas and have actually implemented them already. Thanks also for the Ignore Users feature.

[Forever21]

Haha, some posts in this thread disappeared. This feature is a godsent.

This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by (Name removed). (View It Anyway) ?

Edited by Forever21, 21 August 2011 - 10:29 PM.

[TheFountain]

I see that a lot of my recent 'positive' ratings were removed with this 'update'. Gee, what a fortuitous accident. Immature people just never stop. And the sad part is they are our moderators.

[TheFountain]

Another thing about the rating system that doesn't make any sense is why have it to where your positives/negatives are not both represented? Someone can give you a positive rating, and then someone else can come along and say 'ha ha ha' *click* and take it away, just like that, for the heck of it.

Sorry, but that is a really stupid system for rating. Why not just have both positives and negatives show up along side one another so that even if you get, say, 3 negatives vs 2 positives, people can at least see the positive ratings, even if they are in the minority? In this way you're at least showing that there is disagreement. As opposed to unanimity.

Edited by TheFountain, 29 August 2011 - 12:41 AM.

[Boolean]

This coming from a guy that negative voted me because he took something out of context, then when I did the same he creates this topic.

Do you like... LIVE to argue online? Birds gonna fly, fish gonna swim, trollers gonna troll.

[TheFountain]

How about an option to just opt out of the rating system altogether and become a 'neutral contributor'? This way whoever wants to partake of the silly rating system can do so, and still have their scores reflected whereas other users can simply be viewed as neutral users. Even in the longevity community there needs to be different political systems based on individual choice, ya dig?

[Boolean]

Go make your own site and post there.

[TheFountain]

Right now, if you want to ignore a poster, you'd just have to do it manually, by ignoring the guy, by just skipping / scrolling past down his post.

Again, you can select to hide/fold post below a certain threshold (bottom of a thread) and you can choose to ignore users entirely.

I tried ignoring certain users and got this.

Fatal error: Call to undefined method IPSLib::makenameformatted() in /home/longecit/public_html/forum/admin/applications/members/extensions/usercpForms.php on line 1256

[brokenportal]

Another thing about the rating system that doesn't make any sense is why have it to where your positives/negatives are not both represented? Someone can give you a positive rating, and then someone else can come along and say 'ha ha ha' *click* and take it away, just like that, for the heck of it.

Sorry, but that is a really stupid system for rating. Why not just have both positives and negatives show up along side one another so that even if you get, say, 3 negatives vs 2 positives, people can at least see the positive ratings, even if they are in the minority? In this way you're at least showing that there is disagreement. As opposed to unanimity.

I like that. I don't know if its possible though. That is how they do it in Youtube.

I was thinking about the stars rating today. I invited a variety of people to vote in the referendum and I noticed that many good posters had 3 and 4 stars. Now even though 3 stars is pretty good, it still looks like that person has received many negative ratings which level it out at midway. It seems that in order to get a sense of whether you're doing well or not with the star rating is to have more of them, say 12. That way members who might think that people don't appreciate what they have to offer at 3 stars, can get a different impression if they have say, 9 stars. Then also, it might give people a reason to try to hone themselves in to get to 11 or 12 stars.