Points

Posted by Lucky 7 months, 3 weeks ago to The Gulch: Feature Requests
6 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Three suggestions for changing the way points are used and recorded

At present:
Members, either paid or qualified moochers, can give a point up or down against other member's post.
The total (net) points received by each member is recorded.
Members receiving a specified number of (net) down-points have their new posts partly hidden.

1. Instead, show the up and down points separately. Do not show the net figure. An example-
joannenova.com.au/2019/02/nasa-hides-...

2. As well, every point is identified with the member's Gulch name.
Joe Soap gives a down-point, no problem, but the name Joe Soap is shown as giving a down-point.

3. As well, the system shall keep a running total for down-points any member gives, there is no restriction, a member who gives more than a specified number of down-points (in a week) would have their own new posts partly hidden (for a week).
This would be a reminder that as they are so horrified by others postings maybe they can take a break.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  Solver 7 months, 3 weeks ago
    I don’t think many people would have much of a problem with #1. I don’t. It would be interesting to see which posts create polarization. Right now some incredibly controversial post could have eleven up votes and nine down votes but only show two thumbs up.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  exceller 7 months, 3 weeks ago
    Don't think it is a very good idea.

    It'd generate animosity across the isles.

    The point system is good as it is. It doesn't really count for anything important.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 7 months, 2 weeks ago
    Rebirth of Reason was founded in 2002 and started with pro and con voting, but quickly abandoned down-votes because they were too easily abused. Here, in the Gulch, the cultural norm is that one votes up or down based on the quality of the post. Overwhelmingly, voting actually goes by agreement with the opinion expressed, not how well it is framed or presented, not the extent to which it asks important questions.

    I easily vote Yes for statements I agree with, but I tend to hold the line on Thumbs Down to statements that are shallow, internally contradictory, or lack evidence of forethought. I work pretty hard not to vote down opinions I disagree with. I even cut the Trumpeters slack.

    So, on those grounds, I think that lucky's suggestions have merit and should be considered.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 7 months, 2 weeks ago
      MM Welcome back. In case you have missed there have been good comments on this site over the past month and some which are deplorable.

      Your comments agreeing with me deserve an up-point of course. (!)
      Apart from that, your guidelines for points are worth noting.

      This site, centered on the Atlas Shrugged movie series, and referring to author and philosopher Ayn Rand and Objectivism, attracts a range of opinions. The range covers from strict orthodoxy, fellow travelers, conservatives and libertarians. These and those of religious persuasion make worthwhile contributions.
      The religious can give good comments from what we call the conservative direction. But when viewpoints are not just arguable but are in complete opposition to Objectivism then (their) feelings get heated.
      There is a place for emotion, some are swayed by emotion, other are put off or even disgusted.
      The current point system is not getting the emotional to think and consider before posting.

      Hint to the excitable- If you are angry and have written a reply, just insert a statement to say that you are angry/upset/emotional. This give the reader (some tolerant superiority) and a better incentive to understand what you have written.
      But it is best to cool down and then review.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 7 months, 1 week ago
        Over five years ago, I talled the sales of books by and about Ayn Rand. (On my blog here: https://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/2... That was intended as a reply to ARI's published figures from five years earlier (ten years ago, now). The Wall Street Mortgage Meltdown and the Bush-Obama Bailouts rekindled interest in the works of Ayn Rand, especially Atlas Shrugged.. The first movie could not have been released at a better time. I was in Ann Arbor then, and at the opening I saw one of my friends from the local Republican Party who brought several of his friends to the theater. They did not know of Rand or Atlas. So, there is that.

        But they and I were already old, past middle age. For me, I was celebrating my own lifetime by gaining reflective visibility in a work of art. But I came to Ayn Rand as a teenager. Most of her admirers have, do, and will. If you drill into the ARI website, you can find their Essay Contest Winners. Youngsters are open to new ideas. They want to find their place in the world. They absorb complex facts and arcane technical studies such as epistemology.

        What happened here is that we got a lot of old people who were new to Ayn Rand's Objectivism. They agreed with what they already felt to be true and dismissed what is different from their established views.

        You identified another problem with the Point System. lucky: " If you are angry and have written a reply, just insert a statement to say that you are angry/upset/emotional. This give the reader (some tolerant superiority) and a better incentive to understand what you have written. Most people are not writers. Most comments in reply are short, yea or nay. The intention of a discussion board is to exchange. When people plus up or minus down with little or no comment, the value is missing.

        In fact, I am willing to submit that such people have no value to offer because their epistemologies and psycho-epistemologies are deficient. We all easily blame "public education" for the evil progressive children at university, but no one here self-identifies as intellectually deficient, though so many are. On the other hand, youngsters who discover Objectivism absorb a huge body of new knowledge that overcomes mystiicsm, altruism, and collectivism. The youngsters integrate that new learning into their own worldviews. That is why millions upon millions of people today, can say that they "were influenced by Ayn Rand." That is far different from "agreeing with Ayn Rand."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 7 months, 3 weeks ago
    To elaborate on point 3:
    The Gulch site makes a restriction when a member's point count reaches a certain negative.

    To give many negative points is an indicator that the Gulch is not where that giver should be.
    So, I suggest imposing a similar restriction when the giving as well as receiving of negative points reaches a certain number.

    Anyway, thanks for the opinions.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo