July 8th, 2002, 02:12 PM
I agree with you GG, but I have also seen quite a few threads where there are 5 or 6 posts that are getting a lot of negs. If you only removed certain posts, then a good portion of the replys would be removed, and the thread would basically be sucidal anyway.
One of the things that he has for a check is that it is based on the entire thread level, not just 1 post. So if there is a good thread, with 1 really bad post, make sure that one of the really good posts gets postive points. That will help "balance" the actual thread. I have seen threds where someone makes an excelent reply to a question, yet no one gives that person positive points, even though thats what the points were originally designed for.
\"Ignorance is bliss....
but only for your enemy\"
July 8th, 2002, 02:15 PM
Ohhh I see, sorry dunno how I misinterpreted that; that would make the system more complex but at the same time a lot fairer, and yes, that would be more effective...I think! But on what criteria would you rate a whole thread? Surely it would achieve the same end but indiscriminately, and if you'd posted to it you wouldn't know who was being criticised were the thread closed; I'd be really sad if I had a thread and it got closed without personal messages on negative antipoints explaining why! But I think that's a better way round it, just needs developing as an idea - or explaining to me more thoroughly, sorry am I being really slow here?! :P
[gloworange]The Owls Are Not What They Seem[/gloworange]
July 8th, 2002, 02:21 PM
I agree with you GreekGoddess. Numerous useful threads often turn suicidal, due to one highly negative post.
There really should be "more" checks & balances which ensure that a perfectly useful thread doesn't go suicidal. GreekGoddess is on the right track.
July 8th, 2002, 02:29 PM
Any random person with a few positive APs in their account can neg a thread, causing the total point for that thread to go down. If a bunch of people do this, it takes a while before the thread's closed (I think). Problem lies in when you get heavy-hitters with over 2000 APs negging a thread. You get two or three of those and the total point just plummets. Now, I disclaimer this by saying I don't know if that's correct in my assumption but anywhere a person can assign points, either positively or negatively, those with more points can do more collective 'damage' (or good assign as well).
We the willing, led by the unknowing, have been doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much with so little for so long that we are now qualified to do just about anything with almost nothing.
July 8th, 2002, 03:04 PM
I'm pretty sure that the antipoint effect you have on a post has to do with how many antipoints you have yourself, but again...I'm not sure about that. A thread started in Addicts on a similar topic. It was suggested recently that you could balance out someone's post that may have received negatives for no reason at all by assigning it back to even. The same vice versa. It appears this may have gone into effect. souleman had mentioned it in the thread I was talking about above, and I experience a similar antipoint correction notice when I assigned some greenies to an overall negative post.
This should help if you feel a post has been unreasonably negged or given positives, even if your points don't count as much as someone elses this seems like a fair way to balance things out.
I see what you're saying also souleman. What about contracting the post that has the negatives that would usually make the thread suicidal, where you can no longer give negatives to that user, but the thread can continue, but that person can no longer post to that thread, because he's basically be kicked for it. That way, the deterrence has been taken care of, cannot get banned by over-negging, and the discussion can be continued. And the same idea as I threw out before that a post can go suicidal as it is now if the first post (the one who started the post) asked "How to Hack Hotmail", obviously that post is going to get negs and be a thread full of flames, so there's no point in it's survival, keeping it open, whatever. Did that make sense?
July 8th, 2002, 05:28 PM
It's a good idea GG
Gaaagh!....it's happening to this thread.....
With all the subtlety of an artillery barrage / Follow blindly, for the true path is sketchy at best. .:Bring OS X to x86!
Og ingen kan minnast dei linne drag i dronningas andlet den fagre dag Då landet her kvilte i heilag fred og alle hadde kjærleik å elske med.
July 8th, 2002, 05:42 PM
hmmm..ask me! while i newely arrived at the site and earned one solitary greenie! one of posts erased me and gave me a two brownies!! and that was not even a forbiddin topic...loz..not thatv am complaining..neways...
July 8th, 2002, 09:04 PM
Just ideas to toss out in case they aren't already in action:
- Have a countdown timer.
When the thread goes to 'suicidal', then have it wait a day or 12 hours, and THEN close. (With a little indicator at the top, maybe call these threads: 'probationary' or 'condemned'...) That way people really interested in the discussion are able to add positives and take action to prevent any percieved abuse. As it stands now, there isn't much of a chance for people who LIKE the thread to prevent forced-suicide, because after the deed is done you can't assign antipoints.
- Assign Towards Even
I'd like to re-advance my old suggestion of an antipoint function that would allow you to basically say: "I think this post doesn't deserve positives or negatives, and I want to use my antipoints to keep it that way." Essentially it would let you use the right fraction of an AP assignment (up to a full assignment) in order to bring a post back towards an even value...
- Question... How is sucidal rate calculated?
For a post to be a 'suicidal' post, is it the ABSOLUTE antipoint value, or the AVERAGE value of the post given all of the antipoints? Say a post gets... oh... 5 greens, 3 greens, and 15 reds. The absolute value might be -7, enough to make it suicidal. But the AVERAGE would be -2.33, which is a significant difference. I would suggest that any suicide calculations take into account any positive assignments by using the average rather than the absolute. (This would also reinforce the usefuless of the assign-towards-even feature.)
[HvC]Terr: L33T Technical Proficiency
July 8th, 2002, 09:16 PM
I like the idea of the timer but I don't think it would solve the problem of someone posting something that will be flamed for. What happens if, per se, a topic came up in Cosmos dealing with some specific mathematical theory, greats great responses, everyone is sharing their ideas and such, but someone has to ruin the whole thread (saying Terr originally started it or added some ideas to the original topic) by saying: "Damn that Terr is a freaking moron. He should leave AO, his posts are worthless. What does MATH have to do with SECURITY? Blah, blah, blah." That post ALONE would receive the negatives needed to close that whole thread down, and I don't think that even putting a timer on there would resolve the negatives issued to that post because the person certainly deserved them for making an ignorant comment like that, so why would he receive any balance points?
I like the suicide thread option, it's a great way of keeping the newest members here that have a misconception about what AO is about in line, if not away from here, but it's imposing on the people making valid threads and having an ignorant person post to it and having it close.
I haven't been through all the forums yet today since I last posted, but souleman made a comment earlier in Addicts about something that sounded similar to the assign towards even suggestion you had made a while back. I received a similar notice when I assigned some greenies to a post with overall negative status. I don't remember the quote exactly, but it was something about correcting the antipoint status of the thread. So maybe JP has implemented it, and just hasn't announced it yet? We're probably overwhelming him with all the ideas lately that he hasn't had the time to sort through all of them yet, let alone post features he's finished up on.
EDIT: lawrence171 is a perfect example of what I'm trying to suggest changing. This thread is negative because of an antipoint query he posted. If he gets enough, this perfectly valid thread is going to go suicidal on us.
July 9th, 2002, 12:24 AM
My hotmail thread is not to ask how to hack Hotmail... You ppl's heart are so limited and you seem to sterotype alot here. You have been brain washed, all that you know is that Microsoft = Bad. You people don't even think for yourselves anymore... So, assign whatever point you like. You brainless people will never become leaders if all you think about Microsoft is that they suck, you should actually review and consider factors that had lead you to think that (although most of you just heard other people say so and believed it).