I don't know about any of you, but I can't stand the "unrec" option

[hyphenate]

I think it's one of the few elements of the past year at DU that encourages sniping, feuding and just plain contrariness.

It's also not even logical.

If someone doesn't like something that someone else posted, they can hide it. They can put the originator of such pieces on ignore as well, and they can always do an alert if there is something about the post that needs to be examined by admins or mods.

OTOH, someone's long piece on some element of politics only has the "rec" option to reach more readers. It might not be something that everyone will read, but to the person who wrote it, the only way that they can know that people are reading it--and liking it--is through the "rec" feature.

I think people who unrec something are often cowardly. They don't like something, so rather than criticizing something constructively, they choose to "unrec" it instead. How does that teach a writer anything? All the original poster knows is that someone not only didn't like something, but that they chose to bring that post "down a notch" in popularity.

There have definitely been a lot of changes at DU in the past 9 and a half years, but the "unrec" feature has got to be one of the really bad ideas that has come about, with its value wavering around zero.

Praise, don't punish! Critique, don't lambaste! Make friends, not enemies! But most of all, realize the worth of other posters by not cowardly vote against something just because you don't like the topic being discussed, or that you don't care for the poster writing it.

If someone posts an article excerpt, why should the poster get an "unrec" when they are merely letting more people know about it? If someone doesn't like the contents of an article, they should go directly to the source of the article, and comment there. It doesn't take but a minute to set up an account at that other site, and the proper person gets the criticism directly.

Things are already tense between the variety of posters at DU, and this feature doesn't help ANYONE. It makes people bitter, and it rewards malcontents instead of encouraging people to be friendly toward others.

We all once came together because we were the ones "left out in the cold" so to speak, when 43 became the occupant of the WH. Now, it seems we can't stand each other, as though we have been cooped up somewhere in near claustrophobic circumstances, and no one wants to unite and find fellowship with each other. And nastiness, whether it's a personal attack or an anonymous "unrec" vote, isn't exactly the best approach to achieving any kind of harmony.

[Skittles]

1. I don't use it

I consider it cowardly

[MrScorpio]

3. Same here, Sis

Either Rec, or nothing at all

[Skittles]

4. damn straight!!!

[socialist_n_TN]

55. My view too............

The only time I've ever used the rec feature (and for that matter I've NEVER used the UNrec feature) is once when one of my posting buddies asked me too. Since I agreed with the OP, I recced it. Otherwise, I've not used it at all.

This is a discussion board. A BIG discussion board with a lot of different viewpoints represented. That means there's going to be things that I agree with and things that I don't agree with. If I agree or disagree strongly enough, I'll respond. That will be MY rec and unrec. I'll say what I think and not do it anonomyously.

[SoCalDem]

61. DU's own version of a drive-by shooting

:puke:
It's just a petty way for people to carry on a vendetta and slip away into the ether, unrecognized.

I've been here since 2001, and this is the WORST change ever "offered" to DU.

I Do like the "views", because at least one can tell if something they posted has been read, but the whole "high school newspaper-esue" nature of 'THE GREATEST< BESTEST< SHINIEST EVER" and "LATEST" and the top10 stuff is silly and unworthy of what we used to be.

Little real discussion happens anymore, since there seems to be a wrecking crew in place whose only raison d'être is to put down others, and un-rec anyone they "don't like"..

Just like slipping a nasty note into a 7th grader's locker:(

[Amerigo Vespucci]

76. It's cowardly, it sucks ass, and yet it's still part of "The DU we deserve."

C'est la vie. People who unrec my threads can help themselves to the all you can eat tossed salad bar.

[TBF]

77. Yup, that's the problem with it -

just the nasty folks use it to promote their agendas.

[REP]

2. I see it as a vote for whether it belongs on the 'Greatest' page or not, period

[socialist_n_TN]

59. I guess that might be a reason............

but I've had two threads that I started that went to the greatest threads category and I personally recced NEITHER and they were my own threads. However, they BOTH engendered a LOT of responses and numerous subthreads, so IMO, they were successful threads and subjects.

It's a discussion board. Discuss, damn it! This rec/unrec is just bullshit.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

5. It would be better if it was on the dash.. wouldn't that be great? n/t

[OregonBlue]

6. Go back to old rules, 5 rec's a day and no unrecs.

[A HERETIC I AM]

72. ABSOLUTELY! So every crap thread that simply gets 5 recs can be...

considered a "greatest" thread?

Bollocks.

The way it works now is the cream rises to the top. By advocating for rec only, you advocate for shit to float.


Oh, and unrecc'd for more unrec bullshit whining.

[Cronus Protagonist]

74. WHAT HE SAID ^^^^^^

I'm with you brother. Solidarity. :P

[CTyankee]

86. Hey, you get the prize for the first obligatory "whining" use on an anti unrec thread!

Aren't you special! I was scrolling down just waiting for it and then...oooh, wait for it....YES! your post "Oh, and unrecc'd for more unrec bullshit whining."

You made my day! Thanks!!!

[A HERETIC I AM]

101. Glad to help, since you are one of the most vocal about the feature...

and regularly call for its demise.

Yup...sorry...it is indeed bullshit whining.


Btw, yes. I am special.

[CTyankee]

107. But this "specialness" appears with great regularity, always the same.

It would be great if people had another argument, one with some depth, FOR the Unrec, instead of repeating the "whining" mantra over and over again...if there were some intellectual underpinning to your argument I'd like to hear it. I don't come here to get the same old, same old.

Actually, there have been a very few I have encountered who have articulated a good argument for it. They have been well reasoned and tho I disagreed with them, I respected them for outlining it for the DU audience.

[A HERETIC I AM]

125. The good argument has been articulated over and over again..

by me and many, many others. You just refuse to accept it. As far as my specialness appearing with great regularity, I know for a fact that if you look at all the threads on this subject over the last year, you'll find that YOU have a shitload more posts in them than I do.

Since you can't seem to remember my good argument for the unrec feature, here it is;

Prior to its inception, all it took for ANY thread to get on the greatest page was simply 5 votes. This allowed all manner of threads, including such banal nonsense as "Rec if you like kitties" and other such crap to be considered a great thread. There were essentially two voting choices back then - Yay or Abstain. Now there are three choices. Yay, Nay and Abstain. I, like I'm sure the overwhelming number of DU'rs, simply abstain from voting on the vast majority of threads. What is the point of voting on every single one of them? Surely they are not all deserving of being voted on period, much less voted on as great. However, having the ability to vote Nay allows me to express my opinion that a particular thread is NOT worthy of inclusion on the greatest threads page. By simply voting that way it does not shut the thread down, it doesn't lower the number of eyes that see it, it doesn't stifle argument, it isn't a comment on the integrity of the posts author and it is by no means censorship (all arguments used against unrec). It is simply an anonymous vote. What gets eyes on threads is REPLIES because constant replies, (and even infrequent but steady replies, as evidenced by this thread) is what keeps a thread on the front page of a forum and near the top.

Just because I or anyone else unrecs a thread, it does not mean they hate the individual who wrote OP, it does not mean they are some sort of coward or troll and it doesn't mean they necessarily disagree with the point made in the OP. It simply means "In my opinion, this thread does not warrant inclusion on the greatest page."

THAT'S ALL IT MEANS.

Does the 2nd or 3rd or 15th thread on the same subject deserve to be a greatest thread? No.
Does the 2nd or 3rd or 15th thread on the same subject that is the best written or the most eloquent deserve to be on the greatest page? Perhaps. But, like most democratic processes, majority rules. Its just the with the greatest page you need a majority plus 4 more.

As I said in my "Ode to Unrec;

Suggesting all threads of obscure import
deserve to be making the greatest page sort
is like saying a toddlers crude block construction
earns inclusion in Architecture Today's production

Not EVERY SINGLE pile of blocks a kid put together is a masterpiece of engineering. Not every single thread deserve to have a positive rec count.


Oh unrec, oh unrec, you feature supreme
make it easy to see if a thread holds esteem
by a majority of our fine message board
instead of just five that are easily scored.

As I said above, and has been pointed out HUNDREDS OF TIMES OVER THE LAST YEAR, before unrec all it took was 5 UNANSWERABLE votes to get a thread onto the greatest page. Now you actually have to have a majority plus 4 more. It shows that, of the people inclined to vote at all, a thread does have enough merit.

The people who put up threads and then include as a reply to their own thread things like "Someone unrecc'd this?!?" strike me as among the most pitiful. It is as if they are saying "How on earth could there possibly be someone out there who thinks my excrement has an odor?!?" It strikes me as utterly pointless and just screams out I NEED VALIDATION THAT WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IS WONDERFUL! It is a bullshit point of view and smacks of an extreme lack of self respect and confidence.

As far as the argument that someone should (or be required to) post a reason why they would unrec, this is also fallacious because posting to a thread kicks the thread back to the top of the forums front page. Why on earth would I want to kick a thread simply because I voted against it being on the greatest page? No one ever suggests a requirement that one post when they rec a thread, and this happens all the time, just look at the front page of GD and you'll often see threads with more recs than replies. The idea that there is some sort of organized "unreccing" going on is also nonsense. Every single DU'r who has read one of these threads that I have posted on knows my opinion on the feature, yet not once, NOT ONE SINGLE TIME have I received a PM saying "Hey Heretic, go to this thread and unrec it!" It doesn't happen.

The unrec feature works just fine. It is just that the people like you who are against it can't seem to get their minds around the fact that the sun indeed does not rise and set out of their backsides and not everything that flies off their fingertips on this message board can compare to Homer or Tolstoy.

Constantly complaining that members of this community use a feature of this board that the administrators installed is indeed WHINING. It's like complaining that I didn't bookmark a thread or hide a thread or click the "add as a friend" icon. It's none of your business why anyone else uses the feature. It is time to get over it. Your side lost the war. If you are so concerned that someone who you have never met might have the temerity to vote No on a thread on an obscure message board (and trust me, DU is pretty obscure, as the vast majority of Democrats in this country do NOT post here nor are they aware it even exists) then I would question your perspective.

It isn't the end of the world.

[TexasObserver]

127. You said it well, and it's been said thousands of times the past year.

The notion that the complainers about unrec simply don't understand why the policy is in place is completely unbelievable. They know all too well, and they have read the extensive responses of Skinner and EarlG to their complaints. They just don't want to accept it. The need to require everyone to heel to their approach is obsessive compulsive, which is why they can't stop complaining about it.

The never ending whine will continue.

[A HERETIC I AM]

134. Thanks. You and I obviously see eye to eye on this issue.

Nowadays these threads seem to appear in cycles. We'll go a few weeks without a single one and then a bunch pop up all of the sudden. It is almost ALWAYS started by someone, like the OP, who is complaining about how they don't like the feature. That first thread is followed by a few more which are followed by a few more mocking the first few. It is amusing, if nothing else.

It just astounds me that so many think of rec and unrec like a popularity contest and if there is even ONE negative vote they get their panties in a knot. I have put up threads that have gotten 2 responses and zero recs. I have put up threads that have gotten over 100 responses and a lot of recs AND a few unrecs. It is OK with me either way. If someone thinks what I have posted is not a great thread then they are entitled to their opinion. I really don't give a fuck. In fact, I'm flattered if the number of views and the number of replies is anything better than 4 to 1. That tells me a large proportion of the people who looked at the thread thought enough of it to take the time to type a response.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Someone else asked the question "can someone explain why they would unrec this" and I said "Please don't" I couldn't really care LESS. If some people liked it, then that is good enough for me. If one person out of 100 liked it, then I am OK with that too.

I don't start a lot of threads primarily because most of the subjects I might start a thread about have been done by some other poster. I don't want to be redundant. There are times, like with the thread I linked, that I find something off the wall or obscure and put it up OR I take the time to put together a thread that has current or topical information I think is of general interest, like this one back around the anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing. I was flattered as hell that thread was so well received. If it got any unrecs (and I am sure it did) that was fine too. People are entitled to their opinions.

[CTyankee]

129. The length of your post suggests that you think about this a great deal.

As this is so much a concern of yours, I of course accept your reasoning and I thank you for going over it one more time for me.

I have never posted "I can't believe someone unrecced this" or any variation on that theme. I also don't care if someone unrecs my posts. Here's why: to me, the Greatest page simply doesn't matter. I don't read it. It is of no consequence as to what I will read or not read. I am not swayed by results of a popularity contest. The only thing that matters is whether it is "popular" to me. That is why the argument you raise...fine tho it is...doesn't resonate with me. Perhaps that is why I turned a little bit of a deaf ear to it, so to speak. I recall that when I once saw one of my posts on the Greatest page I was a bit taken aback...So your reference to my so called self importance is just silly...

I also don't believe anyone should be required to post anything. I never said that, ever.

[A HERETIC I AM]

139. Number of posts on this thread by CTyankee so far: 17

Number of posts on this thread by A HERETIC I AM, including this one: 5

Number of posts on this thread by CTyankee: 5
Number of posts on that thread by A HERETIC I AM: 2

Number of posts on this thread by CTyankee: 3
Number of posts on that thread by A HERETIC I AM: 0

Number of posts on this thread by CTyankee: 1
Number of posts on that thread by A HERETIC I AM: 0

Is it the length of the post or the number of them that defines how much thought one puts into a subject?

I can go on, but this is getting tedious and pointless.

Yeah, I typed a long post. That was so I could make my point clear, not just because I "think about this a great deal". I have also thought a great deal about how I am going to make my car payment this month, but I haven't nor will I start a fucking thread about it.

I have never posted "I can't believe someone unrecced this" or any variation on that theme.

I never said you did. I brought that up in my last post because it is a common theme on many threads and one that I find absurd.

I also don't care if someone unrecs my posts. Here's why: to me, the Greatest page simply doesn't matter. I don't read it. It is of no consequence as to what I will read or not read. I am not swayed by results of a popularity contest. The only thing that matters is whether it is "popular" to me. That is why the argument you raise...fine tho it is...doesn't resonate with me. Perhaps that is why I turned a little bit of a deaf ear to it, so to speak.

If it isn't important to you then why is it you are consistently among the most vocal AGAINST THE FEATURE? Your argument against does not resonate with me. We're even!

Have a good day, and may all your posts be well received.

[CTyankee]

147. I want to apologize to you for my being so flippant. I should not have done that.

You really did take the time to explain something to me that I should have gotten the first or at least the second time it was explained. It is a fair point of view. I guess I was arguing for something that I needn't. I do feel strongly about an exchange of information but your explanation now makes sense to me. That the Greatest page is not my cup of tea is really beside the point here.

Please accept my apologies for being doltish...no excuses...

[A HERETIC I AM]

148. Fair enough. Apology graciously accepted. n/t

[SidDithers]

136. Best post about unrec ever...

:applause: :applause:

Sid

[TexasProgresive]

7. There should be a forced post for rec/unrec

Regardless whether the rec/unrecer puts anything in the post there should be one with rec or unrec in the subject line and their name. I've never understood why it is anonymous. I suggested this to Skinner so time ago but got no reply.

On edit: I see that you have negative recs. I reced and it's still at 0!

[FBaggins]

9. Which would only bump the thread.

If your purpose if to tell others "this would be a waste of you time" (as a rec is a "worth your time") then you wouldn't want to bump the thread.

IMO, lefty's #8 is a good solution. Then you can also see which topics are controversial.

[SidDithers]

52. No, there shouldn't...nt

Sid

[CTyankee]

119. I don't believe in "forcing" but philosophically I agree that folks "should" explain

why they are Unreccing. For one thing, I'd like to know their argument against the post and why they are Unreccing. If they "hit and run" I don't hear their side of the argument. That's a loss to our democratic discussion forum. I may not agree, but isn't that the purpose of DU? To learn and to exchange ideas?

[TexasProgresive]

128. What makes you think the unrecers are Democrats?

I think a forced post with their screen name would help weed out freeper trolls who unrec for fun.

[Kaleva]

144. How does one weed out freepers who rec for fun?

Those who work to get a flamebait thread put on the Greatest Page?

[TexasProgresive]

153. Either way the disrupters are know.

Even if they don't get tombstoned individuals can put them on their ignore list. Those who pay attention will see a pattern that is not productive to good discussion.

[lefty2000]

8. The Present System Is Misleading and Unfair

It is misleading to show only the net count. The total number of votes should be displayed as well. A net count of near zero could be interpreted as lack of interest, but showing the total as well as the net is a good measure of interest and degree of controversy.

It is also unfair in that it allows a majority to muffle the views of the minority.

[Bunny]

33. How does Unrec muffle anyone's views?

The threads are still there, for anyone to see. Unrec doesn't magically make threads disappear, for chrissake. One of the few things I cannot stand on DU is the constant whining about Unrec. Dear God, get over it.

[CTyankee]

89. Oooh, the "whine" thing again! This is #3! yay...

[Bunny]

103. Heh. Speaking of whining....

...don't you have some neighbor you can go snitch on? :rofl:

[CTyankee]

108. Well, Bunny, what's on your mind? Would you care to engage me in

further conversation?

Please do. I look forward to chatting with you further. Anytime.

Oh, and a great good morning to you, too!

(edited to add a polite greeting to Bunny today!)

[lefty2000]

105. I am Not Opposed to Unrec

I am asking for full disclosure. Publish votes for and against. Don't just show the net. I am not whining. I am using logic to solve you people's problem so I won't have to hear about it anymore.

Thank you.

[CTyankee]

106. Great idea! I have said this lots of time also...but some disagree with the 'publish" part.

They just want to be anonymous...

[Bobbieo]

10. It also presents a form of censorship which most of us abhor.

[wyldwolf]

15. the 'rec' feature gives DU a "mob rules" appearance

[Skittles]

99. let me guess

only when the opinions expressed do not coincide with your own

[Codeine]

16. The story doesn't go anywhere,

so it's anything but censorship.

[KansasVoter]

19. LOL....you want to censor my unrec?

[pipi_k]

113. Unrec isn't censorship

You can post what you like.

That doesn't mean anyone else is obligated to agree with you on how important it is.

Even if your thread gets 100 unrecs, your words are still there in their original form.

[Fumesucker]

11. DU is not the same group it was even just a few years ago..

There has been an influx of posters with more sensible, pragmatic, moderate centrist views over the years and particularly in the last two as many people flee the Republican party. On the other hand many of the more outspoken leftys have left or been TSed. Appeals for impeachment and/or prosecution of Bush/Cheney et odious al used to be constant here, now they are becoming rare.

[pipoman]

21. I believe it is because

for a President to be elected in this country he must carry the centrist, "swing voters". Aside from a third party candidate changing the vote split, this is the only way Obama was elected. Now those voters feel a part of the party, and they are here.

[Fumesucker]

27. Why would a low information voter even bother?

People who post on DU are ones who care and/or are interested in politics, anyone who can be swung from Dem to Repub basically doesn't really care about the nuts and bolts politics and likely doesn't know squat about political events and policy.

The division here on DU strikes me more as between those who support.the.Dems.no.matter.what.they.do versus those who are more interested in policy and end results.

[wyldwolf]

12. I think it's wonderful. It neutralizes the artificially rec'd thread

You know - when people send out private messages, e-mails, and posts on other message boards asking people to come to DU and rec a thread.

[alphafemale]

13. please...not this shit again.

I just used my first unrec ever.

I just announced it.

Happy now?

[LWolf]

14. I agree. If the site owners are worried about internal division,

I hope they look at how the unrec feature favors that division.

[Codeine]

17. And the cliquey silliness of the Rec feature is just as bad.

Unrecced for unrec whining.

[SidDithers]

53. +1...

my preference would be to abolish rec, and allow only unrec votes. Every post starts with a 0 score, and the crap, like this OP, gets unrecc'd. We could also have a special page on DU for DU's Worst Threads, where anything with more than 5 unrecs gets listed for a period of 24 hours.

Sid

[CTyankee]

90. Hooray!

[KansasVoter]

18. I 100% disagree....and so should you........

There are enough fools here to rec almost ANY POST above 10.

Make a post saying "Obama has failed!" and enough idiots will rec that post. I WANT the option to unrec such garbage.

[Heidi]

20. But the rec button encourages peace, love and understanding, right?

I can assure you that for every person whose thread gets on Greatest there are dozens of DUers whose threads don't get there. Quality of content often is not the deciding factor on whether a thread makes it to Greatest. Other factors can include recognition of the OP's name, the OP's popularity, and the fact that the topic of a given thread may simply be (or not be) the burning issue of the day.

I've seen plenty of mean-spiritedness played out here with the rec button over the years, so I don't think the issue of rec/unrec is as black and white as some insist.

[Codeine]

22. Stop looking at the "Greatest Page" and it ceases to matter.

I've been here for years and I've never looked at it -- LBN, GD and GDP, and some of the smaller forums are where I go. I pay no attention to Rec and UnRec numbers, and neither should you.

[pipoman]

23. I don't even know where the greatest page is..n/t

[Codeine]

24. Thus your reading is completely unaffected by the Unrec feature. nt

[pipoman]

25. UR, because I am tired of rec/unrec whining...nothing could be less important, IMO..

[NoPasaran]

26. Unrecced for whining about unrec

[CTyankee]

92. Yes, yes, yes! MOre please!

[bluerum]

28. since even 'mild pesonal attacks' are vebotten the unrec option is a viable option

[Upton]

29. This whining about the unrec feature has gotten real old

unrec

[TBF]

30. +1 - but of course it doesn't show because all the "unrec'ers" have

been here. Anything that is not completely positive of Obama is unrec'ed. That's the plan and we see it in action every day. It is message control, censorship. It is the worst feature on this website.

[pipoman]

31. Nonsense

There are rules for posting here, this is Skinner's living room and it isn't a "free speech zone". That said, the unrec feature doesn't have shit to do with 'censorship'. Your OP and posts remain regardless of the number of "unrecs" given.

[TBF]

32. I stand by my opinion.

I haven't been a member as long as you but I was here for the last election. We used to be able to talk about other democrats here, but now it is all Obama 24/7.

[TexasObserver]

35. It's called "democracy." The side with more votes prevails.

Because more posters who look at this thread UNRECOMMEND it than RECOMMEND it, the Unrecs outnumber the Recs. This is because the admins designed it to work like that. The function is working exactly as it was intended, keeping threads such as this one off the Greatest Page.

[Fumesucker]

36. But in voting in the real world you cannot remove votes from a candidate..

You vote for the candidate you prefer, if some other voter votes for another candidate that then gives the other candidate a vote it doesn't remove a vote for your candidate.

It really isn't quite the same thing as voting in the real world.

[SidDithers]

58. Voting in the real world is more than just voting for a candidate...

ballot measures in local, regional and national politics, in the House and in the Senate, in State Houses, and City councils are almost always decided by an Yea or Nay vote. And the question at issue with DU is whether a thread is worthy of appearing on the Greatest Page - yea or nay.

Before, we could only vote Yea. How democratic was that?

You'd be right only if we were electing DU's Homecoming King and Queen. But we're not.

Sid

[Fumesucker]

96. You're right.. I should know better than to post when I'm tired and distracted..

I was thinking "elect" rather than "vote".

Mea maxima culpa.

[TexasObserver]

65. Nonsense. In the real world, we vote on referenda.

It's exactly the same thing as voting in the real world, except here some have the belief they should be insulated from rejection.

[Fumesucker]

95. You're right.. I should know better than to post when I'm tired and distracted..

I was thinking "elect" rather than vote..

[Fumesucker]

94. Delete... Posted in the wrong place..

[potassiumnitrate]

84. Who CARES?

It just keeps things off the greatest page. That's it. It doesn't stop people from reading or seeing the thread. Everybody stop already with the incessant whining about t he unrec. God.

[TexasObserver]

34. Unrecommend. Write the admins. It's a feature they created.

Why posters continue to complain on the board about the feature is a mystery. You should write the admins and tell them everything you think justifies your point of view, but you're calling them out in this OP.

[pipi_k]

37. It's true that if we don't like a thread topic we can "hide" it....

which is exactly what I did when the "Glen Beck this" and "Glen Beck that" threads started showing up by the dozens the other day.

But I also unrec'd them before I hid them.

Just because I was so annoyed at having to navigate the same old dreck being posted over and over and over. Honestly, it looked like an OCD fest here yesterday.


PS... this thread unrec'd for whining about unrec.

[Iggo]

138. I couldn't hide them fast enough.

I finally gave up and went shopping.

[pipi_k]

145. Hah...I know what you mean....

It was like that Tribbles episode on "Star Trek"





:rofl:

[The_Commonist]

38. I think unrec is the dumbest thing this site...

has ever done. I have never used it, and never will. It's only purpose seems to be to start arguments and get people whining. I really wish it would go away.

[pipi_k]

40. Well, really, it's not always the "thing" that causes arguments...

If it's not the unrec feature, it's something else.


People argue over nonsense most of the time anyway.

[Deep13]

39. I like it.

I don't use it much, but when I do it is because I think the point of the thread is so misguided or silly that I really want to express disapproval. Some people will "rec" some pretty ridiculous things just because on its surface it agrees with some aspect of liberalism.

In any case, I don't think the matter is worth getting worked up over.

[fishwax]

41. I think unrec is pretty much irrelevant

It's not censorship or a way to stifle conversation -- the posts don't disappear nor are they more difficult to access if they have a low rec count because of unrecs. They simply don't go on the greatest page. It's certainly not unusual to find a post that has 100+ replies but a "0" in the recommend column.

[Catshrink]

42. Not this shit again... unrec for the whining

get over it.

[Spider Jerusalem]

43. I don't know about you, but I can't stand the 'Greatest' page

I find that all too often the topics which one finds there are there because of posters actively begging for recommendations ('rec this if you agree that') and that generally there's no real debate or discussion, just the equivalent of an echo chamber. I think the unrec option is a good thing because it negates this tendency to some extent and improves the ratio of signal to noise for those who DO rely on the 'Greatest' page rather than the main fora.

[Stevenmarc]

44. Anyone that has a problem with unrec should...

immediately turn the computer off, stand up, go outside, breath in some fresh air and get a little fucking perspective back in their life.

[pipi_k]

50. Perspective? What's that???

There are, right at this very moment, people dying in Pakistan from the flooding...

The unrec feature is obviously way more important to some than human suffering...

[Skittles]

100. ridiculous

some of us know how to multitask - you sound like you need some lessons

[pipi_k]

117. After a few seconds of thought and a consultation with my dog...

I have decided that you are right.

Getting unrecs on one's topics really does rate high up on the scale of human/personal tragedy.


Thanks for showing me the error of my ways.



:eyes:

[Skittles]

154. you're wecome

I detest people who think one can only care about one fucking thing at a time

:eyes:

[Vickers]

45. Another cowardly, anonymous, trollish Unrec from me. n/t

[UTUSN]

47. U censored my Rec!1 n/t

[Vickers]

54. Es tut mir leid!

:P

[UTUSN]

57. No problemmo!1 n/t

[Kalun D]

46. Why Are You Against Voting?

It should be known whether a post is popular or not

voting is democracy

the only thing wrong with rec/unrec is it doesn't count NO votes.

[BoWanZi]

48. Quit whining, this is a no-whining zone

Unrecced for whining.

Please grow a pair. If you post a thread, who cares if it gets unrecced or recced. I don't think I have ever even looked at the greatest page, I just normally come to general and lurk and post once in a while.

Why are people so damned intent on protecting other's feelings at the expense of honest (or sometimes dishonest LOL) criticism?

[CTyankee]

114. Welcome to DU, Bo!

As you can see above, I have an issue with the "whining" meme. Perhaps you haven't been here long enough (I sure have!) to see that meme repeated over and over again to people who have issues with the Unrec function. It is a meme designed to cut off debate, IMO. And it speaks to the dearth of substantive thought about why some DUers dislike it.

My thought is this: if people have an argument against the view that the Unrec function is not helpful to free and open discussion on a discussion board, then that argument should be fully articulated. Just repeating the "whine" meme robotically suggests shallow thinking and knee jerk conformity. I don't like to think that is the norm on DU. I like to experience full, free debate of ideas. But the "whine" meme is depressingly simplistic and is done ad nauseam.

I think we can do better here. Please, take some time to give this more thought or at least to elaborate on the thoughts that you have on it. I would like to hear about it...it would be refreshing!

[seabeyond]

49. i have seen threads about dissing women and watched the recommend grow

as men get a chuckle at going after women to get it on front page. i like unrec

[SidDithers]

51. Unrec...nt

Sid

[SargeUNN]

56. what bothers me more is

a topic like this will get more replies than a topic that goes to the core of our problems or news items that doesn't have Beck, Palin, Limpballs, or some other wacko.

[ozone_man]

60. It would be better to have recs and unrecs separate.

That way there is a much better idea as to the controversial nature of the thread. To have 100 recs cancelled by 100 unrecs doesn't really tell us much of anything.

Also, there are many threads that you might disagree with enough to unrec it, but that you still want to rise to greatest page status. So, again, it is counter productive. I have used unrec no more than five times. As it exists, I don't think it is a helpful feature.

[AnArmyVeteran]

62. Unrec is a tool for the petty. I believe most people use it to attack people they don't like.

[pipi_k]

63. Well that could be true, but...

how is that any worse than people using "rec" for people they DO like even if what's written is utter bullshit?


:shrug:

[Codeine]

64. +1

The "popular kids" are just mad because their little group of sycophants doesn't run the show anymore.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

93. "The "popular kids" are just mad because their little group of sycophants doesn't run the show...

anymore"


:rofl:



+1,000,000



I don't always agree with your posts, but I always read what you say (because I agree more often than not).

[TexasObserver]

67. Unrec is a tool created by the admins.

Its use is vital to keeping the garbage off the Greatest Page.

It does exactly what they designed it to do - get rid of the garbage threads that would otherwise make it to the Greatest Page.

[HughMoran]

70. I wish I could unrec this post

:rofl:

Now that you've clicked on my post, realize that it's just a joke ;)

[SidDithers]

104. Hey! Welcome back!...

:hi:

Sid

[Rex]

66. It gives cheap power to a bunch of lazy trolls

and then there are the people who actually don't like your post. Should we be allowed to tell each other we don't like your posts? Sure, if the people want it and the admins make it so. I am no big fan of the rec/unrec stuff, but don't have any respect for the unrec trolls out there - who would they love the 'site that shall not be named here'.

Then there are the people that do drive-by clicks and on to the next page, who knows what motivates them? Maybe the wind.

[hack89]

68. Unrec for whining. nt

[CTyankee]

91. Great! Rec for originality!

[hack89]

97. I try my best. nt

[HughMoran]

69. "Ignored" people still appear on the Greatest Page.

IF Skinner would make if so IGNORED MEANS IGNORED, NO EXCEPTIONS (i.e. Greatest Page), then I would agree with you to some extent.

My solution to the excessive and coordinated unrec campaigns off-site is to limit unrecs to 5-10 per day per user - use them wisely. Even recs could be limited so that teh stupid threads don't make it to the GP.

[potassiumnitrate]

71. All unrec does is keep a thread off the greatest page

That's it. That's all it does.

It doesn't remove the thread. It doesn't keep people from voicing their opinion. It doesn't make a statement about the quality of the thread, or whether or not the poster who posted it is wrong about something, or a total idiot. It doesn't prevent people from replying to the thread. It doesn't keep the thread off the latest page.

It doesn't do anything. Except keep the thread off the greatest page. That's it. That's all. Period, end of story. Nothing more, nothing less.

STOP FUCKING BITCHING ABOUT THE FUCKING UNREC OVER A YEAR AFTER IT HASN'T DONE SHIT TO RUIN THE DU EXPERIENCE IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER WITH THE EXCEPTION OF HAVING TO SEE ALL OF THESE FUCKING THREADS BITCHING ABOUT THE UNREC STILL AFTER ALL THIS TIME

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[superduperfarleft]

78. Childish? You mean like whining about "censorship" because of the unrec function?

At this point, I say get rid of both rec and unrec, because I'm sick of the fucking crybabies whining about the unrec feature day in and day out.

[TBF]

83. I'd agree with getting rid of both. nt

[CTyankee]

88. Oooh! Exciting, this SECOND use of the term "whining" to describe the unrec function!

Sorry you weren't the first to get there! But YOU are special TOO!

[superduperfarleft]

111. STOP TRYING TO CENSOR ME!!!!

Don't you have some neighbor's trash you could be digging through?

[CTyankee]

115. Good morning! How are you today?

I am open for discussion about your post. What do you have in mind? Would you care to elaborate on your thoughts?

Please let me hear from you! I really want you to say more because if you really have something to say, you should just say it...no, er, "whining..." (sorry...) :hi:

[superduperfarleft]

79. +1 gazillion. n/t

[Liberal_in_LA]

75. me either

[MoonRiver]

80. It's a feature that encourages childish acting out, and I hate it.

I'm not on DU as much as I was before unrec was instituted.

[pipi_k]

123. Not sure how this could be possible, really...

I mean, any feature or option having the power to encourage childish acting out.


Take it away and there will only be some other thing that will "encourage" people to act out.

[hyphenate]

81. I guess I struck a nerve!

I don't spend enough time at DU anymore to care about the "unrec" option, and I certainly didn't post this topic to "whine" about it. I posted it only with the intent that I, as a long time member of DU, personally thought it was irrelevant.

To each his or her own.

I really didn't think that this would garner any votes, negative or positive. I gave my reasons why I don't like the feature, and that was it. I guess a firestorm can be created out of anything, eh?

[Kalun D]

82. LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!

A post whining about unrec

gets UNREC'd!!!!!

[ZombieHorde]

85. I love unrec. Unrec can be very satisfying for battling pet peeves.

If someone uses censored profanity (F**k) in their OP, I unrec.

If someone uses the word "literally" for the word "figuratively" in their OP, I unrec.

If the subject line of the OP begins with the word "it," I unrec.

If an OP is very vague, I unrec.

If an OP contains obvious logical fallacies, I unrec.

Sometimes I unrec on accident.

Your OP did cross any of my pet peeves, so I did not unrec this thread.

[CTyankee]

87. I like to unrec when I get mad that somebody disagreed with me!

It's not FAIR!

I just HATE when that happens! And I'll unrec when I WANT to and HOW I want any time I WANT to!

So there!

[ZombieHorde]

102. Most excellent. nt

[CTyankee]

135. Glad you liked it! I stole it from my 12 year old granddaughter (also unfair)...

Her school schedule did not come in the mail. It's UNFAIR! Her sister made a face at her. It's NOT FAIR! Someone ate her piece of pie...it is SO UNFAIR!

All accompanied by a pouty face...

[Soylent Brice]

122. The Unrec Dance

We can unrec if we want to.
We can leave your friends behind.
Cause' your friend don't unrec,
and if they don't unrec, well they're
no friends of mine.

U-u-u-u, N-n-n-n, R-r-r-r. E-e-e-e, C-c-c-c

Unrec Dance!

[ZombieHorde]

142. Funny. nt

[AsahinaKimi]

98. I want an

Ice cream/Un Icecream option.



Then again, I could never UnRec Ice cream...

[CTyankee]

109. "Who could Unrec an Ice cream option?"

nt

[Arkansas Granny]

110. I don't hate the unrec feature, I just hate all the whining about it.

There are times when the first reply to a post is the OP bitching that "someone unrecced my thread" and blaming it on trolls or freepers.

Just think about it for a minute. If a thread has much merit at all it's bound to get at least 5 more recommends than unrecommends. Not every thread is good enough to make it to the greatest page.

[CTyankee]

116. Yes, AND it would be great if people would explain why they Unrec without

even a brief comment about why they are Unreccing (and please, the "whine" thing is just getting old and doesn't say anything of substance).

I thought this was a board that was meant for discussion. Well, let's discuss then!

[Arkansas Granny]

121. If someone wants to unrec a thread, why would they want to make

a comment that would give that thread a kick? BTW, if some people would stop whining, other people would stop commenting on it.

[TexasObserver]

126. So you think you need explanations for unrecommends.

No, you don't. You don't need to know who voted, how they voted, or why. You only need to know whether the Recs outnumber the Recs. That's the system the owners of the site created. They've heard and rejected your constant complaints to change it.

You seem to think you're entitled to require others to post on a thread to register the thought "this one is a waste of your time." If so, start your own site and make that a rule. Here, we don't have that rule. Here, the owners have considered your complaint and rejected it. Here, we still value the private nature of voting. Here, other posters don't answer to you and your need to control the voting habits of others.

People Unrec threads because so many threads are not worth the time it takes to open and read them. How can you look at the board without wondering where all the Recs come from? Who would recommend half the threads that have positive recommends? People with no standards, it would appear.

Start a campaign to require everyone who recommends a thread to post on the thread explaining why they think it should be on the Greatest Page. "Because I like the poster who started the thread" is often the reason, it would seem. How anyone can recommend some of the useless threads started here is a mystery.

[CTyankee]

132. Please take my comment as meaning to improve discussion, not to force anyone to do

anything. Mine was a suggestion.

If it were up to me, there would be no Rec either. I rarely Rec and never Unrec, even if I don't like the thread (if I feel that strongly about it, I post my disagreement).

I get the argument that it is simply a matter of whether a post goes on the Greatest page. That DOES make sense that it would be important to some DUers, but it isn't important to me because I never read the Greatest thingie. I scan the posts. Funny me, I can make up my own mind about what I want to read or not read. But I accept the fact that there are people here who like to be told "this one is popular." It's fine that it's popular, no argument there. It is simply immaterial in terms of whether I will read a post or not...it's that simple...

[Kaleva]

143. People will also give a rec without comment.

If one would be required to provide comment before being able to unrec, they also ought to be riquired to give comment before giving a rec too.

No one yet has been able to show that the unrec feature actually censors or decreases the readership of a particular thread. Some say it does but they offer no proof to support their claim. They just express an opinion that it does.

[PBS Poll-435]

112. In other news...

It's Monday!

Unrec Thread!

[bigwillq]

118. I like it

what I don't like is all the people that complain about it. Just bringing more attention to it, if you ask me.

[Ohio Joe]

120. unrec'd for STILL crying about unrec - nt

[guardian]

124. unrecced

for needless, thin skinned, whining.

[inna]

130. i like it; but i can't stand threads about it.

unrec.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

131. fer fuck's sake...this is STILL going on?

[Iggo]

133. It's worth it for the entertainment value alone!

[pipi_k]

140. hahahahaha....

I don't know why I find this funny, but I do...

:7

[harun]

137. For stuff not worth critisizing, stuff that shouldn't be posted, one

can unrec it.

I like the feature.

[stevenleser]

141. Yep, its a silly feature.

I really dont care if 5 DUers like something that I disagree with and it goes to the greatest page. I think it is useful to know that.

Right now, if 180 DUers rec something, and 180 unrec it, that item shows 0. If 200 rec and 190 unrec, it shows +10.

If Facebook implemented a dislike feature, FB would degenerate into a negative place very quickly. I'm not saying unrec is the cause of the problems around here, but it doesnt help, that is for sure.

[yurbud]

146. instead of net total, show both rec AND unrec count for posts

that would give a better picture and would help people looking for controversial posts (there's no point in just saying amen when everyone already agrees).

[Javaman]

149. This post reminds me of a classic DU thread regarding the unrec function entitled...

"I WILL NOT BE SILENCED!"

For the long time members, I think you recall the one I'm talking about.

It was just about the funniest thread I think there ever was on DU.

[Iggo]

150. Anybody have that one bookmarked?

I tried site search for "I WILL NOT BE SILENCED!", but that led to a whole bunch of other stuff. (There's a LOT of people who will not be silenced, in case you didn't know.)

[Javaman]

155. I think the mods scorched from the archives.

I had bookmarked it, but it vanished from my bookmarks.

That poster has subsequently been banned. not because of that post but because of later craziness.

[dipsydoodle]

151. Its useful for making a point

without kicking a broadly speaking meritless piece of crap to which the OP keeps responding himself to help prevent it sinking where it belongs. The rules prevent me from quoting examples.

The alternative may be to give us the ability of responding without kicking. That suggestion has been made before.

[onehandle]

152. It keeps the stupid off of the front page.

During the horrible primaries, a post calling one of our own candidates a very offensive word was voted to the front page before mods noticed. Unrec gives us all the power cut down on the stupid. This is why it exists.

The front page used to be embarrassing. A lot less these days.