Negging one person = closed thread? - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Negging one person = closed thread?

  1. #11
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    Silly question:-

    Since we can assign AP's to the thread _or_ the person why can't the AP system be altered so that a AP's against an individual has no effect on the status of the thread and AP's assigned to the thread itself has no effect on any user in it. In this way a (L)user can be negged to death when they post crap in a good thread but the thread remains open and their inane comments are hidden. If the thread itself is utter garbage then people can neg the thread to death and no-one in it is affected.

    This would serve well because it would give a better indication of the tread content on the front page since, right now, a perfectly good thread appears as "extremely negative" if a numbnuts has appeared in it.

    I know... I'm a genius....
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  2. #12
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    Silly question:-

    Since we can assign AP's to the thread _or_ the person why can't the AP system be altered so that a AP's against an individual has no effect on the status of the thread and AP's assigned to the thread itself has no effect on any user in it. In this way a (L)user can be negged to death when they post crap in a good thread but the thread remains open and their inane comments are hidden. If the thread itself is utter garbage then people can neg the thread to death and no-one in it is affected.

    This would serve well because it would give a better indication of the tread content on the front page since, right now, a perfectly good thread appears as "extremely negative" if a numbnuts has appeared in it.

    I know... I'm a genius....
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  3. #13
    Super Moderator
    Know-it-All Master Beaver

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,914
    Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
    Silly question:-

    Since we can assign AP's to the thread _or_ the person why can't the AP system be altered so that a AP's against an individual has no effect on the status of the thread and AP's assigned to the thread itself has no effect on any user in it. In this way a (L)user can be negged to death when they post crap in a good thread but the thread remains open and their inane comments are hidden. If the thread itself is utter garbage then people can neg the thread to death and no-one in it is affected.

    This would serve well because it would give a better indication of the tread content on the front page since, right now, a perfectly good thread appears as "extremely negative" if a numbnuts has appeared in it.

    I know... I'm a genius....
    Hey Hey,

    Not that it matters what I think... but my answer to that would be balance...

    Let's say there's a **** thread... full of **** replies... and there's no mod around... If you wanted.. right now you could neg the thread and all the replies.. for some members (actually prolly quite a few of the seniors)... that would prolly be enough to close it.... If they weren't affected by eachother... you would't close the thread and it'd continue to get worse waiting for a mod..

    Quite honestly... it's a matter of using your APs responsibly.... It's kind of like playing with a loaded gun... If you see a thread is slightly negative.... and you don't want to see it close.. Then you greenie someone else (or the thread itself)... but if you want to see it close.. that's your right and opinion.. and in theory you've earned the APs to do it.. As MsM said... you can always PM a mod and there are ways to reopen the thread... I think it's very seldom that a thread ends up closed that was a worthwhile thread....

    Just my 2 cents.

    Peace,
    HT
    IT Blog: .:Computer Defense:.
    PnCHd (Pronounced Pinched): Acronym - Point 'n Click Hacked. As in: "That website was pinched" or "The skiddie pinched my computer because I forgot to patch".

  4. #14
    Super Moderator
    Know-it-All Master Beaver

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,914
    Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
    Silly question:-

    Since we can assign AP's to the thread _or_ the person why can't the AP system be altered so that a AP's against an individual has no effect on the status of the thread and AP's assigned to the thread itself has no effect on any user in it. In this way a (L)user can be negged to death when they post crap in a good thread but the thread remains open and their inane comments are hidden. If the thread itself is utter garbage then people can neg the thread to death and no-one in it is affected.

    This would serve well because it would give a better indication of the tread content on the front page since, right now, a perfectly good thread appears as "extremely negative" if a numbnuts has appeared in it.

    I know... I'm a genius....
    Hey Hey,

    Not that it matters what I think... but my answer to that would be balance...

    Let's say there's a **** thread... full of **** replies... and there's no mod around... If you wanted.. right now you could neg the thread and all the replies.. for some members (actually prolly quite a few of the seniors)... that would prolly be enough to close it.... If they weren't affected by eachother... you would't close the thread and it'd continue to get worse waiting for a mod..

    Quite honestly... it's a matter of using your APs responsibly.... It's kind of like playing with a loaded gun... If you see a thread is slightly negative.... and you don't want to see it close.. Then you greenie someone else (or the thread itself)... but if you want to see it close.. that's your right and opinion.. and in theory you've earned the APs to do it.. As MsM said... you can always PM a mod and there are ways to reopen the thread... I think it's very seldom that a thread ends up closed that was a worthwhile thread....

    Just my 2 cents.

    Peace,
    HT
    IT Blog: .:Computer Defense:.
    PnCHd (Pronounced Pinched): Acronym - Point 'n Click Hacked. As in: "That website was pinched" or "The skiddie pinched my computer because I forgot to patch".

  5. #15
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    But it's a two step process to neg a person if the thread is good because you then have to undo the damage you did to the thread.

    Since we have the ability to neg either it is perfectly logical to separate the functionality, (and I'm sure it's not a whole lot of programming..... )
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  6. #16
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    But it's a two step process to neg a person if the thread is good because you then have to undo the damage you did to the thread.

    Since we have the ability to neg either it is perfectly logical to separate the functionality, (and I'm sure it's not a whole lot of programming..... )
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  7. #17
    Senior Member Deeboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    185
    Wow, this all good information.

    I have a suggestion, even if it IS my own thread to begin with.

    I assume the thread status is based on total antipoints assigned in the thread. What if the AntiPoint Status of the thread was based on a percentage instead? I will just throw a number out like 10%. So if 10% of the posts are positive, that will cause the thread to go positive.

    Disclaimer: If this is already how it is done, please excuse me and don't neg me. j/k

    -Deeboe
    If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
    - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

    http://tazforum.**********.com/

  8. #18
    Senior Member Deeboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    185
    Wow, this all good information.

    I have a suggestion, even if it IS my own thread to begin with.

    I assume the thread status is based on total antipoints assigned in the thread. What if the AntiPoint Status of the thread was based on a percentage instead? I will just throw a number out like 10%. So if 10% of the posts are positive, that will cause the thread to go positive.

    Disclaimer: If this is already how it is done, please excuse me and don't neg me. j/k

    -Deeboe
    If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
    - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

    http://tazforum.**********.com/

  9. #19
    AFLAAACKKK!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,065
    I hope you guys aren't refering to me as one of the idiots... I just thought it was humorous that someone who I've never seen contribute to the site (been here a year and only has 80 posts, obviously doesn't contribute much) thought it was his duty to police the forums...

    I didn't say anything to him that wasn't family friendly .
    I am the uber duck!!1
    Proxy Tools

  10. #20
    AFLAAACKKK!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,065
    I hope you guys aren't refering to me as one of the idiots... I just thought it was humorous that someone who I've never seen contribute to the site (been here a year and only has 80 posts, obviously doesn't contribute much) thought it was his duty to police the forums...

    I didn't say anything to him that wasn't family friendly .
    I am the uber duck!!1
    Proxy Tools

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •