User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 236

  1. #21
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    20,123

    Default

    I generally think that people know that it was me who left the message! if not, I'm trying to be nice to someone anonymously!

    I haven't given anyone negative feedback though, so this is probably irrelavant!
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  2. #22
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    erm. well. I don't know about everyone, but I've taken to signing off my comments. Almost signed off with my real name once, that was a close call. *lol*
    That's a bonza idea, mate. I think I'll do likewise.


    (was that a predictable ENTP response or what?)
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  3. #23
    ~dangerous curves ahead~
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    2,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPiranha View Post
    I simply worry people are going to start censoring everything they say for fear that they aren't being witty or insightful enough.
    At this point (despite the droolworthyness of your avatars which causes a BAM to me everytime), I have to disagree:

    I think it'd make most think before they post. Not necessarily censor. I'm all for it if it raises the amount of intelligence and constructive ideas, providing more prodigal verbiage for folks to cogitate upon. I've personally found the posts got more polished, thoughtful and funny since the poll actually.

    Freedom of speech is a good thing, but if the freedom comes without responsibility, it becomes abuse. The poll stops that better than any madmins stepping in to censor this and that, I surmise. It is allowing the group to reach a level of moderation the majority can accept vs the rule of a few which will undoubtedly be questioned?

    But this then works both ways, the poster can use anonymity, but perhaps should question why he/she is refusing the other a chance to refute or repay the compliment (yes, that's my bait =D, I'm going wonky trying to figure out who's leaving what still), since this is a board of relatively intelligent folks who can hold their own, or agree to disagree, isn't it.

    And I do trust that someone on the mods side can see all the comments and whom left it anyway.

  4. #24
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JivinJeffJones View Post
    As do I. Preferably on the relevant thread or via PM, however, so I may explain/defend myself.



    Seems like a recipe for paranoia to me.
    Well, what if the person just wants to comment on the post without having that comment impact the way they are perceived by the other person? The point was to assess the quality of the posts, not the people, right?

    And the thing is that for me, if I get criticism from a person, I tend to think it's just their opinion, and associate it with them. If it's anonymous, I'm forced to just evaluate what might have made them say that about me, and try to avoid it in the future, without attributing blame to them for seeing it that way. It might allow people to offer advice to improve themselves that they would be too modest to offer otherwise. Does that make sense?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I think that's a little ridiculous -- you think it's simply better to insult someone to their face, in a medium that affects their reputation? It's *still* politics!

    Honestly, if you really don't like something someone wrote, and you don't think it's something to make a public issue out of, whatever happened about addressing someone privately in PM about it... where they have an opportunity to actually respond to your complaint? That way, misunderstandings can be worked out.
    In my opinion, it's different because A) No one else can see the comments, and B) The first person isn't blamed for having the perspective, the other person is only presented with it. That seems fair to me, and I would be willing to have the same done to me.
    One of the most insulting things I ever received in my life...
    I'm sorry to hear about that, but I think you took it differently than it was intended. They were only trying to be helpful, and offer a reminder. You took it personally, and that's probably not what they intended. Their comment was about the piano and the church, not you personally.

    That's just my two cents. Good luck resolving this situation.

  5. #25
    The Black Knight Domino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    eNFJ
    Enneagram
    4w3 sx/so
    Socionics
    eNFJ Ni
    Posts
    11,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    At this point (despite the droolworthyness of your avatars which causes a BAM to me everytime),
    I have an arsenal. Don't provoke me to unleash it.


    I have to disagree:

    I think it'd make most think before they post. Not necessarily censor. I'm all for it if it raises the amount of intelligence and constructive ideas, providing more prodigal verbiage for folks to cogitate upon. I've personally found the posts got more polished, thoughtful and funny since the poll actually.

    Freedom of speech is a good thing, but if the freedom comes without responsibility, it becomes abuse. The poll stops that better than any madmins stepping in to censor this and that, I surmise. It is allowing the group to reach a level of moderation the majority can accept vs the rule of a few which will undoubtedly be questioned?

    But this then works both ways, the poster can use anonymity, but perhaps should question why he/she is refusing the other a chance to refute or repay the compliment (yes, that's my bait =D, I'm going wonky trying to figure out who's leaving what still), since this is a board of relatively intelligent folks who can hold their own, or agree to disagree, isn't it.

    And I do trust that someone on the mods side can see all the comments and whom left it anyway.
    I totally get what you're saying. That does make me think of it a bit differently now. Thanks!
    eNFJ 4w3 sx/so 468 tritype
    Neutral Good
    EII-Fi subtype, Ethical/Empath, Delta/Beta
    RLUEI, Choleric/Melancholic
    Inquistive/Limbic
    AIS Holland code
    Researcher: VDI-P
    Dramatic>Sensitive>Serious

  6. #26
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aelan View Post
    I think it'd make most think before they post. Not necessarily censor. I'm all for it if it raises the amount of intelligence and constructive ideas, providing more prodigal verbiage for folks to cogitate upon. I've personally found the posts got more polished, thoughtful and funny since the poll actually.
    I would agree, in theory, but disagree with the results (least from my own small sample of posts that have been ranked).

    The most likely outcome is that people's natures of posting will change in order to appeal to a particular class of people - those that will add to reputation. Self censorship of ideas that may not gain reputation (ie: not be popular, seperate from the value it may or may not have) would occur, while an increase of posts that would be, essentially, karma whoring.

    It rarely increases the value of posts because good posts take a very long time to write/research/think about. Short witty posts get as much attention, and certainly the cost-benefit between the two favors the shorter posts by far.

    The argument I am having with myself is if having the feedback itself is worthwhile relative to the influence on behaviour. Even as someone who doesn't care much about the reputation, other behaviours will change to adapt to their 'perceived' rank. It is akin to ranking students in a class - even though it may be "fair", those at the bottom of the ranks simply try less hard, while those at the top expect it.

  7. #27
    Senior Member JivinJeffJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    Well, what if the person just wants to comment on the post without having that comment impact the way they are perceived by the other person? The point was to assess the quality of the posts, not the people, right?
    Assessing the quality of posts is fine by me. "Gross" is fine. That is saying something about the content of the post. "Mean-spirited" is saying something about the intent of the post, which is saying something about the poster.

    If the comment had said "Your comment (singular) is gross and seems mean-spirited" I would be okay with it. I might not agree with it, but I would accept it. The comment did not say that, however. Having said that, I think a PM would still be an infinitely better option.

    I would hate to see this forum lose its sense of humour. Were that to happen, I would go back to INTPc, and I think we all know what they would think of that.

    A possible solution would be to offer a multiple-choice type option for why a post has been deemed worthy of a negative reputation.

  8. #28
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    I share pt's apprehension that it might start to become all about the ratings, and we know what that does to TV...

    I'm also reluctant to add to the furore, as it'd just be playing right into Haight's hands
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  9. #29
    Senior Member JivinJeffJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    3,698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I would agree, in theory, but disagree with the results (least from my own small sample of posts that have been ranked).

    The most likely outcome is that people's natures of posting will change in order to appeal to a particular class of people - those that will add to reputation. Self censorship of ideas that may not gain reputation (ie: not be popular, seperate from the value it may or may not have) would occur, while an increase of posts that would be, essentially, karma whoring.
    I don't think people are likely to change the way they post to get more positive reputation points. I think they may, however, avoid posting anything which could conceivably offend anyone after a little negative reinforcement, even if everyone else on the forum would enjoy the post. If you have one negative report for a post and no counterbalancing positive reports, then you could well decide that such comments are universally disapproved of on the forum.

  10. #30
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JivinJeffJones View Post
    I don't think people are likely to change the way they post to get more positive reputation points. I think they may, however, avoid posting anything which could conceivably offend anyone after a little negative reinforcement, even if everyone else on the forum would enjoy the post. If you have one negative report for a post and no counterbalancing positive reports, then you could well decide that such comments are universally disapproved of on the forum.
    Those established might not need to - they can ride their existing persona... but forums are also about environment. Reputation is more than a number - you can see the +20 jokes, and such. It's all a form of conditioning. That, and new people likely will as reputation inflation takes over.

    Again, though, it is a balance. I'm not sure if it is a net benefit, however, I am positive that there will be a behavioural impact.

    A lot of it has to do with the limitation of the system (as you say, all reputation is +/- with no way to define "good post" vs "witty" and "bad post" vs "I disagree with you). Likewise we have, for all intents and purposes infinite reputation - even besides inflation, it becomes easy to encourage "my point of view" rather than "good quality post". I expect that will be the most obvious effect, and will likely lead to some cliqueish "camps" of agreement. That is, of course, assuming that the reputation becomes ingrained in the forum culture (Way to early to tell if this is so. Most people seem to be rejecting or ignoring it.)

Similar Threads

  1. [INFP] Getting to know INFPs here
    By greysteppenwolf in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-17-2008, 10:43 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Any ISFP's married to NF's here???
    By BookLady in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-21-2008, 06:06 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Do you really want to hurt me? (here's your chance!)
    By miss fortune in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 01-02-2008, 09:22 PM
  4. Trade negative for positive reputation points here
    By Maverick in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 12-11-2007, 08:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO