Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

While a thread can be rated, why isn't it enough either to see <5 or to see >4?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:45 PM
Original message
While a thread can be rated, why isn't it enough either to see <5 or to see >4?
Edited on Wed Aug-12-09 07:46 PM by Boojatta
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well the unrec whining has *almost* stopped. I guess it's sort of like theoretical exponential decay
It never *quite* goes away, just gets closer and closer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Why would you be unsatisfied if you could just see either...
Edited on Wed Aug-12-09 07:48 PM by Boojatta
a rating of <5 or a rating of >4?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. It doesn't matter if I agree with the "substantive" point or not. Unrec whining...
is fucking pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-13-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. The rules for un-rec remain unwritten.
For example, I could say (note the word "could", indicating a hypothetical about to begin) that you just violated a personal rule that I have. I could say that I will respond by giving an un-rec to every thread started by you that I happen to notice in time, regardless of what "substantive" point (I'm borrowing your words and format when I write it like that) it contains.

What's interesting about that hypothetical is that I don't even know whether or not that would count as "abuse" of the un-rec system.

Is it okay to un-rec any thread, regardless of content, if it is on a topic that violates your own personal rule that the topic isn't to be discussed on DU? You already announced that you are doing that. Perhaps that's itself an abuse. I don't know that either.

One of the best things about DU is that there are written rules. I can't recall seeing any cases where a DU thread was locked on the grounds that it violates some rule that doesn't officially exist and isn't even described as a general rule but is only described in its application to the specific thread that is being locked. That kind of thing happens routinely on other message boards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Obamanaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. unrec nt
Edited on Wed Aug-12-09 07:52 PM by Obamanaut
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
5. FER FUCK SAKE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abumbyanyothername Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
6. Is this ever going to end?
I mean can we go back and debate the Federal Reserve Act too?

(That is my one bump to an unrec thread this month.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smalll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. I'm honestly confused. Can we actually see negatives, or just "less than zero"?
Edited on Wed Aug-12-09 08:01 PM by smalll
I can't see negatives. I think unrec has, in the end, turned out to do the job it was set to do without causing other problems. It would be a lot worse if we could see the level of negatives. Where do we see that on a thread? (Like say, on this one.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. The best part of having Unrecommend is ...
... finally being able to vote against these threads you start that always seem to be about nothing, and done badly.

Why isn't it enough to be able to see the actual number of net recommends or an indication that it is in the negative? Why can't you accept that the DU owners, admins and membership are happy with this system?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-12-09 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. "Why isn't it enough to be able to see the actual number of net recommends or an indication...
that it is in the negative?"

It is enough. It may be more than enough, and the surplus may have unexpected consequences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-13-09 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
11. *sigh*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-13-09 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Did any...
Edited on Thu Aug-13-09 07:24 PM by Boojatta
thoughts prompt that sigh?

No --> Thank you for your comment. At Boojatta Word Generation Corporation, we care about our readers, and appreciate that you were able to take the time to express your emotions.

Yes --> Please express some of those thoughts in words, preferably including not just interjections, but verbs and nouns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loyalkydem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-13-09 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. as someone
pointed to me in my medicare thread. There are Republicans on here pretending to be democrats. Imagine how they feel if we went over Freerepublic.com pretending to be Republicans. Although the thought of that makes me want to vomit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-13-09 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Hold up right there. Apologize and delete your post. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-13-09 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Have you ever heard the expression "don't cast pearls unto swine"?
Edited on Thu Aug-13-09 07:32 PM by Boojatta
Now tell me, can you classify everyone? Given some person, do you either know without a doubt that the person is a swine, or know without a doubt that the person isn't a swine?

If there is doubt, then the only way to obey the rule is to avoid casting pearls unto someone who might be a swine.

Now, the poster above didn't claim to know that you are a swine, so what's your complaint?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Nov 13th 2024, 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC