I've reduced the number of reactions to just Off Topic and Upvote/Downvote. See how you like that.
I agree with the others you have removed the wrong ones. The upvote/downvotes are the ones causing all the problems. Most of us do not want posts to move up or down based on votes as that makes no sense. While I found insightful, awesome and LoL pointless they did no harm. Upvotes and downvotes on the other hand serve no useful propose and just cause problems.
I've reduced the number of reactions to just Off Topic and Upvote/Downvote. See how you like that.
Removing 'Awesome' is a cure for a non-existing ailment. Intstead, it's 'Downvote' which needs to go. It leads to spite-downvotes (see my own account, for instance), and is being abused to push threads down, also out of spite.
As I've argued before, every type of ranking you guys had in mind, can be accomplished by upvoting only -- sans all the negative effects of downvoting.
As I've argued before, every type of ranking you guys had in mind, can be accomplished by upvoting only -- sans all the negative effects of downvoting.
^ I agree with this. I suppose you could say that posts that receive more up votes are automatically down voting other posts by moving them down the list - which would accomplish the same thing as the down vote button in the long run.
Zactly! But, as I also said, abusing upvoting is a lot harder, as effectively downvoting someone would anount to having to upvote everyone else in the thread: and I'd like to think no one is that insane (or at least lazy enough not to go thru so much trouble).
And if there are those of you out there who are targeting people specifically to down vote their posts, that's not nice.
It's already clearly happening, with ppl and with entire threads.
on the Reddit page, they can run bots that downvote people without having to be confrontational, and there is the whole "Cryptic Defense force" of posters here, this gives them a weapon to shut down criticism without having to actually confront it, drive 'problem' posters away without having to explain it to their middle-ground supporters, etc. etc.
With all the dumb posts I've read recently, this just takes the cake. Reddit moderators are running bots to shut criticism down?!
WTF! Sure, they remove critical posts at times, but that's because they are worded in an extremely crude and rule breaking manner. However, there have been plenty of critical posts that are very well written and have also gotten tons of upvotes. I know majority of Reddit leadership is extremely critical of the game's overall direction, too, and they openly voice their criticism every now and then.
Heck, I posted it to read to Zooey (u/KerbherVonBraun) who happens to be one of my best friends, and I quote "The notion any of us have any interest in defending Cryptic from anything is laughable".
Nobody really was bothered about the upvotes or insightful or even the lol button. But the downvote was being abused and it doesn’t add anything helpful to the forums.
Not sure about how Reddit works in terms of bots but that sounds a bit tinfoil hat. I will say though that the forums don’t need to imitate Reddit. What we have here is it’s own system and up/down votes are not needed. Discussion happens here without gimmicky vote systems.
This is why PWE gets some flak on occasions. Can someone please link us to the profile of the person responsible for this mix up that resulted in the up/down voting remaining so I can downvote every post they have until this mess is fixed?! :P
on the Reddit page, they can run bots that downvote people without having to be confrontational, and there is the whole "Cryptic Defense force" of posters here, this gives them a weapon to shut down criticism without having to actually confront it, drive 'problem' posters away without having to explain it to their middle-ground supporters, etc. etc.
With all the dumb posts I've read recently, this just takes the cake. Reddit moderators are running bots to shut criticism down?!
WTF! Sure, they remove critical posts at times, but that's because they are worded in an extremely crude and rule breaking manner. However, there have been plenty of critical posts that are very well written and have also gotten tons of upvotes. I know majority of Reddit leadership is extremely critical of the game's overall direction, too, and they openly voice their criticism every now and then.
Okay, maybe I agreed a little too fast with patrickngo on his paragrapgh about the auto-bot thing. I don't think that's a real thing (if for nothing else, the Reddit powers that be wouldn't need to resort to bots, but could just manipulate the voters database directly, if they were truly so inclined: no need to go external when you own the place). Anyway, I can't really see bots happen here, because it actually shows who voted you down.
But on the subject of bots, why not treat downvotes *as if* they were made by bots?! As in, make them subject to rate-limiting, for instance (only X many per day from poster Y, and/or only so many downvotes from poster X to poster Y on day Z). And then auto-flag infractors for 'suspicious behavior', and relegate their actions to a moderator.
Or, you know, just get rid of downvoting altogether.
Nobody really was bothered about the upvotes or insightful or even the lol button. But the downvote was being abused and it doesn’t add anything helpful to the forums.
Yeah. Personally, I can perceive virtually no real drawbacks to upvoting. Friends tend to upvote each other a bit (hehe, reminds me of The Land of Hy-Brasil; as Arnulf explains, "We are all just terribly nice to each other.") And I like upvoting: just to support someone, to say "Thank you!", or just "Hey, here's a hug!"
As for downvoting, make a poll, Cryptic, and I'll be the first to downvote it.
Nobody really was bothered about the upvotes or insightful or even the lol button. But the downvote was being abused and it doesn’t add anything helpful to the forums.
Yeah. Personally, I can perceive virtually no real drawbacks to upvoting. Friends tend to upvote each other a bit (hehe, reminds me of The Land of Hy-Brasil; as Arnulf explains, "We are all just terribly nice to each other.") And I like upvoting: just to support someone, to say "Thank you!", or just "Hey, here's a hug!"
As for downvoting, make a poll, Cryptic, and I'll be the first to downvote it.
My only real concern with upvotes is that it potentially in the future may lead to certain posters being looked upon as "better" than others because the amass more upvotes and have a higher score.
Before the system existed we were all equal and you judged each person on the merits of their post contents. Now it might end up with people seeing those with high scores as the "best" members round here, when in reality the whole "upvoting friends" circle can skew such things.
Really i just don't see the point in a system as it brings little to a forum that already works pretty well at promoting varied and active discussion.
I've reduced the number of reactions to just Off Topic and Upvote/Downvote. See how you like that.
I definitely liked the other buttons over up/down. I think those set discussions into a simple binary and the display of voters could easily reinforce tribal self-identity within active discussions. The other stuff I liked for giving kudos without easily playing to mechanics in forum trench warfare (lol, awesome). I'd like it if those were re-introduce and (if possible) made star trek themed (logical, honorable, yellow alert [for off topic].)
Post edited by duncanidaho11 on
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
I am starting to think this system is not needed. Please let us return to the previous system. Though if we do have this system permanently, move the vote up to left of vote down, and vote down to the right of vote up, or better yet, move vote up to the right and vote down to the left after vote up, then put flag and quote at the end. Also, certain devs should look at Reddit and certain devs should look at the forums and important things we need to know should be placed on the forums first and then Reddit, not the other way around. Thanks.
I definitely liked the other buttons over up/down. I think those set discussions into a simple binary and the display of voters could easily reinforce tribal self-identity within active discussions. The other stuff I liked for giving kudos without easily playing to mechanics in forum trench warfare (lol, awesome). I'd like it if those were re-introduce and (if possible) made star trek themed (logical, honorable, yellow alert [for off topic].)
I have to disagree with you on the "Yellow Alert" part. The button labels need to be as clear and direct as possible. Star Trek references are inappropriate, because not everyone understands what they mean. Not everyone who plays this game is a Star Trek fan. Maybe, they just wanted to try a new MMO. Or maybe, they've only seen a few episodes or one of the movies. Furthermore, even Star Trek fans may not understand what "Yellow Alert" means; it's not clear to me that "Yellow Alert" means "Off Topic".
I think the decision to keep the "Vote Up" and "Vote Down" buttons was deliberate and the entire point of introducing this voting mechanic in the first place. PWE doesn't want to see posts in which people are arguing, because it drives new players away from the game. They want the game to seem like a fun and happening place, and the forums aren't doing enough to make that impression. The moderators aren't sinking controversial threads fast enough for their tastes, so they're looking faster way that doesn't require manual intervention.
I definitely liked the other buttons over up/down. I think those set discussions into a simple binary and the display of voters could easily reinforce tribal self-identity within active discussions. The other stuff I liked for giving kudos without easily playing to mechanics in forum trench warfare (lol, awesome). I'd like it if those were re-introduce and (if possible) made star trek themed (logical, honorable, yellow alert [for off topic].)
I have to disagree with you on the "Yellow Alert" part. The button labels need to be as clear and direct as possible. Star Trek references are inappropriate, because not everyone understands what they mean..
I disagree that's at all a problem. Ambiguity allows for creative reinterpretation, allowing a small set of buttons to cover a wide range of possible responses. Lol, Awesome, and off topic are all proscriptive and ultimately less useful because of that than the highly generalized vote up/down (a point in their favor.)
If we want to avoid potentially reinforcing tribal conflict through a direct means of polarization (voting can act in service of controversial posts too, elevating non-issues by dint of demagoguery and participation bias. Active rage threads tend to be populated by those who feel most strongly about them,) but still provide a wide toolset for encouraging fun discussion; then ambiguously titled reactions that gain impact through context would be a better choice IMO (again, if it's at all possible. Vanilla may only be providing a list of preset responses for Cryptic to choose from.)
Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
on the Reddit page, they can run bots that downvote people without having to be confrontational, and there is the whole "Cryptic Defense force" of posters here, this gives them a weapon to shut down criticism without having to actually confront it, drive 'problem' posters away without having to explain it to their middle-ground supporters, etc. etc.
With all the dumb posts I've read recently, this just takes the cake. Reddit moderators are running bots to shut criticism down?!
WTF! Sure, they remove critical posts at times, but that's because they are worded in an extremely crude and rule breaking manner. However, there have been plenty of critical posts that are very well written and have also gotten tons of upvotes. I know majority of Reddit leadership is extremely critical of the game's overall direction, too, and they openly voice their criticism every now and then.
Heck, I posted it to read to Zooey (u/KerbherVonBraun) who happens to be one of my best friends, and I quote "The notion any of us have any interest in defending Cryptic from anything is laughable".
all archived, all buried. most very, very short. which is what downvotes do.
"Archived" is Reddit's way of telling that the post is so old you shouldn't (and well, can't) post on it anymore. Kind of anti-necro measure. "Buried", what does that even mean? All of the comments were if not the most, then second most upvoted responses in their respective threads.
Just for kicks, here's another one, with multiple critical posts heavily upvoted. Plus, just look at the depth of the discussion - you'll NEVER see anything like that in here. https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/7xasrc/stats_of_the_allied_pilot_escort_bundle/
In here, the best you get is "it's good, because i like it" "it's bad, because it sucks". That's all. It's extremely rare someone is capable of formulating exact mathematical proof.
I've reduced the number of reactions to just Off Topic and Upvote/Downvote. See how you like that.
I've been through this thread again. It's 'Vote Up' 'Vote Down' that are the issues not the others.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
I definitely liked the other buttons over up/down. I think those set discussions into a simple binary and the display of voters could easily reinforce tribal self-identity within active discussions. The other stuff I liked for giving kudos without easily playing to mechanics in forum trench warfare (lol, awesome). I'd like it if those were re-introduce and (if possible) made star trek themed (logical, honorable, yellow alert [for off topic].)
I have to disagree with you on the "Yellow Alert" part. The button labels need to be as clear and direct as possible. Star Trek references are inappropriate, because not everyone understands what they mean..
I disagree that's at all a problem. Ambiguity allows for creative reinterpretation, allowing a small set of buttons to cover a wide range of possible responses. Lol, Awesome, and off topic are all proscriptive and ultimately less useful because of that than the highly generalized vote up/down (a point in their favor.)
"Ambiguity [that] allows for creative reinterpretation" is exactly what I'm trying to avoid. If you think that's a positive, then we're never going to agree. If you label the "Off Topic" button "Yellow Alert", then people are going to press it for trivial disagreements they have with a post. A moderator looking at the post won't know why it was flagged.
If we want to avoid potentially reinforcing tribal conflict through a direct means of polarization (voting can act in service of controversial posts too, elevating non-issues by dint of demagoguery and participation bias. Active rage threads tend to be populated by those who feel most strongly about them,) but still provide a wide toolset for encouraging fun discussion; then ambiguously titled reactions that gain impact through context would be a better choice IMO (again, if it's at all possible. Vanilla may only be providing a list of preset responses for Cryptic to choose from.)
Yes, voting can also act the service of controversial posts. However, I think whoever decided to add voting to the forums wanted it for the opposite reason: they want an automatic mechanism for burying controversy. I don't think they understand the Pandora's box they've opened up.
I am doubtful of humanity's ability to correctly interpret things through context. Misunderstandings occur even between people who speak the same language and are culturally similar. When you add cultural differences and linguistic barriers, misunderstandings are even more likely.
Yeah promoting tribal conflict is the biggest issue I think. Up/down vote are being cast against those of opposing views or those who are deemed friends without much thought to actual post content. It essentially provides an easy means to promote ones friends higher and beat down dissidents against ones cause without even trying to engage with them. The end result, people or posts start looking better or worse despite never really being conversed with properly. It’s a sort of playground popularity contest that ultimately leads to a sort of elite class of poster who feels themselves above the pack due to some little numbers next to a profile, or the vilification of those with lesser numbers beside their profile.
Comments
I agree with the others you have removed the wrong ones. The upvote/downvotes are the ones causing all the problems. Most of us do not want posts to move up or down based on votes as that makes no sense. While I found insightful, awesome and LoL pointless they did no harm. Upvotes and downvotes on the other hand serve no useful propose and just cause problems.
Removing 'Awesome' is a cure for a non-existing ailment. Intstead, it's 'Downvote' which needs to go. It leads to spite-downvotes (see my own account, for instance), and is being abused to push threads down, also out of spite.
As I've argued before, every type of ranking you guys had in mind, can be accomplished by upvoting only -- sans all the negative effects of downvoting.
Zactly! But, as I also said, abusing upvoting is a lot harder, as effectively downvoting someone would anount to having to upvote everyone else in the thread: and I'd like to think no one is that insane (or at least lazy enough not to go thru so much trouble).
It's already clearly happening, with ppl and with entire threads.
With all the dumb posts I've read recently, this just takes the cake. Reddit moderators are running bots to shut criticism down?!
WTF! Sure, they remove critical posts at times, but that's because they are worded in an extremely crude and rule breaking manner. However, there have been plenty of critical posts that are very well written and have also gotten tons of upvotes. I know majority of Reddit leadership is extremely critical of the game's overall direction, too, and they openly voice their criticism every now and then.
Man, just look at that criticism being downvoted and swept under the rug.
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/6wc0u5/video_state_of_the_game_text_version_in_comments/
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/6v8z3d/video_this_is_sto_pvp/
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/622c2q/tribble_powers_revamp_qa_feedback_bug_reports/dfz280w/?context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/678v8w/allied_escort_refund_raffle_for_the_community_by/dgootsm/?context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/6znvwt/announcing_the_dranuur_colony_fleet_holding/dmwt7vw/
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/354nw4/update_from_trendy_about_the_doff_xp_issue/cr146iz/?context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/67hbc6/season_13_escalation_bug_reports_feedback/dgqlzt8/
Heck, I posted it to read to Zooey (u/KerbherVonBraun) who happens to be one of my best friends, and I quote "The notion any of us have any interest in defending Cryptic from anything is laughable".
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
Nobody really was bothered about the upvotes or insightful or even the lol button. But the downvote was being abused and it doesn’t add anything helpful to the forums.
Not sure about how Reddit works in terms of bots but that sounds a bit tinfoil hat. I will say though that the forums don’t need to imitate Reddit. What we have here is it’s own system and up/down votes are not needed. Discussion happens here without gimmicky vote systems.
Okay, maybe I agreed a little too fast with patrickngo on his paragrapgh about the auto-bot thing. I don't think that's a real thing (if for nothing else, the Reddit powers that be wouldn't need to resort to bots, but could just manipulate the voters database directly, if they were truly so inclined: no need to go external when you own the place). Anyway, I can't really see bots happen here, because it actually shows who voted you down.
But on the subject of bots, why not treat downvotes *as if* they were made by bots?! As in, make them subject to rate-limiting, for instance (only X many per day from poster Y, and/or only so many downvotes from poster X to poster Y on day Z). And then auto-flag infractors for 'suspicious behavior', and relegate their actions to a moderator.
Or, you know, just get rid of downvoting altogether.
Yeah. Personally, I can perceive virtually no real drawbacks to upvoting. Friends tend to upvote each other a bit (hehe, reminds me of The Land of Hy-Brasil; as Arnulf explains, "We are all just terribly nice to each other.") And I like upvoting: just to support someone, to say "Thank you!", or just "Hey, here's a hug!"
As for downvoting, make a poll, Cryptic, and I'll be the first to downvote it.
My only real concern with upvotes is that it potentially in the future may lead to certain posters being looked upon as "better" than others because the amass more upvotes and have a higher score.
Before the system existed we were all equal and you judged each person on the merits of their post contents. Now it might end up with people seeing those with high scores as the "best" members round here, when in reality the whole "upvoting friends" circle can skew such things.
Really i just don't see the point in a system as it brings little to a forum that already works pretty well at promoting varied and active discussion.
Where is a Judge Q meme of deLancie laughing and saying, "He doesn't understand!" when you need one!?
Edit: Darm my terrible memory for the correct quote. :P Fixed it!
I definitely liked the other buttons over up/down. I think those set discussions into a simple binary and the display of voters could easily reinforce tribal self-identity within active discussions. The other stuff I liked for giving kudos without easily playing to mechanics in forum trench warfare (lol, awesome). I'd like it if those were re-introduce and (if possible) made star trek themed (logical, honorable, yellow alert [for off topic].)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
So you get rid of the ones that are perhaps useful while keeping the ones causing irritation?
Have a downvote!
“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” -- Benjamin Franklin
I have to disagree with you on the "Yellow Alert" part. The button labels need to be as clear and direct as possible. Star Trek references are inappropriate, because not everyone understands what they mean. Not everyone who plays this game is a Star Trek fan. Maybe, they just wanted to try a new MMO. Or maybe, they've only seen a few episodes or one of the movies. Furthermore, even Star Trek fans may not understand what "Yellow Alert" means; it's not clear to me that "Yellow Alert" means "Off Topic".
I disagree that's at all a problem. Ambiguity allows for creative reinterpretation, allowing a small set of buttons to cover a wide range of possible responses. Lol, Awesome, and off topic are all proscriptive and ultimately less useful because of that than the highly generalized vote up/down (a point in their favor.)
If we want to avoid potentially reinforcing tribal conflict through a direct means of polarization (voting can act in service of controversial posts too, elevating non-issues by dint of demagoguery and participation bias. Active rage threads tend to be populated by those who feel most strongly about them,) but still provide a wide toolset for encouraging fun discussion; then ambiguously titled reactions that gain impact through context would be a better choice IMO (again, if it's at all possible. Vanilla may only be providing a list of preset responses for Cryptic to choose from.)
Notable missions: Apex [AEI], Gemini [SSF], Trident [AEI], Evolution's Smile [SSF], Transcendence
Looking for something new to play? I've started building Foundry missions again in visual novel form!
"Archived" is Reddit's way of telling that the post is so old you shouldn't (and well, can't) post on it anymore. Kind of anti-necro measure. "Buried", what does that even mean? All of the comments were if not the most, then second most upvoted responses in their respective threads.
Just for kicks, here's another one, with multiple critical posts heavily upvoted. Plus, just look at the depth of the discussion - you'll NEVER see anything like that in here.
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/7xasrc/stats_of_the_allied_pilot_escort_bundle/
In here, the best you get is "it's good, because i like it" "it's bad, because it sucks". That's all. It's extremely rare someone is capable of formulating exact mathematical proof.
Oh, and if you want more recent examples, because "previous one was archived; waahh!! censorship! Look at me, I have no idea how Reddit works!"...
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/9fs69b/cryptic_its_really_about_time_starship_traits/
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/9eey8o/the_bug_report_ui_than_no_one_uses_needswork/
https://www.reddit.com/r/sto/comments/9dvpv9/introducing_random_task_force_operations/
Again, we can see heavily critical comments just buried with massive amount of (bot driven) downvotes, amirite? /s
U.S.S. Buteo Regalis - Brigid Multi-Mission Surveillance Explorer build
R.R.W. Ri Maajon - Khopesh Tactical Dreadnought Warbird build
My Youtube channel containing STO videos.
Commanding Officer U.S.S. Helena C
I've been through this thread again. It's 'Vote Up' 'Vote Down' that are the issues not the others.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
"Ambiguity [that] allows for creative reinterpretation" is exactly what I'm trying to avoid. If you think that's a positive, then we're never going to agree. If you label the "Off Topic" button "Yellow Alert", then people are going to press it for trivial disagreements they have with a post. A moderator looking at the post won't know why it was flagged.
Yes, voting can also act the service of controversial posts. However, I think whoever decided to add voting to the forums wanted it for the opposite reason: they want an automatic mechanism for burying controversy. I don't think they understand the Pandora's box they've opened up.
I am doubtful of humanity's ability to correctly interpret things through context. Misunderstandings occur even between people who speak the same language and are culturally similar. When you add cultural differences and linguistic barriers, misunderstandings are even more likely.
Up/down vote are being cast against those of opposing views or those who are deemed friends without much thought to actual post content.
It essentially provides an easy means to promote ones friends higher and beat down dissidents against ones cause without even trying to engage with them.
The end result, people or posts start looking better or worse despite never really being conversed with properly.
It’s a sort of playground popularity contest that ultimately leads to a sort of elite class of poster who feels themselves above the pack due to some little numbers next to a profile, or the vilification of those with lesser numbers beside their profile.