Hey Skinner: Can't we just have an "un-recommend?"

Does anyone else think it might be a good idea to get some of the anti-Clinton/anti-Obama stuff off the Greatest Threads/Homepage by simply having a "counter-recommend" or "do not recommend" link next to "recommend"? We could even do this for just "General Discussion: Primaries."

It seems like supporters of each candidate just recommend the most ridiculous crap about one of our candidates as a way of getting back at that right-wing talking point posted about their own candidate the day before.

Let us all battle it out off the beloved homepage.

Anyone with me?

Numbered ratings.

It has cluttered up the home page and it should embarrass every member of DU to see the crap that's been placed there for all the world to see.

:applause:

Let the vitriol be hard to find.

I've actually been guilty of it in the past but I'm trying to be better. We've got to hold this thing together.

:P

:rofl:

It's true mommy, I promise!

I rarely click on them, but....damn, it's a nasty toxic polluted forum at this time.

If I had my first choice, we would be able to hide GD-P posts ENTIRELY. Those of us who are very much annoyed with the disintegration of the "Greatest" page would have a shorter list of posts to read, but it beats sifting through the unbearable to find the worthier, more interesting topics.

GD P is nothing but infighting. Keep it in its own box and leave the Greatest Page to threads that have more of a shelf life.

EDIT: To remove stupid smiley -- well, maybe not so stupid, considering the reference.

But of course by being able to negatively affect people you don't like, it could have the effect of reinforcing a consensus by punishing those who don't share it.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

maybe a thumbs up/thumbs down/neutral system?

For example, I wish I would filter all threads with the word "cult" in them

computer froze.

Wherein, you would be able to slap someone's ass to approve a thread. You might also have a second option, one that would count only 1/2 of an ass-slap, the attaboy/girl.

However, if there are too many ass-slaps of the wrong sex, the poster would be banned for sexual harassment. It would be a crap-shoot as to whether or not you get banned each time.

Only this system presents itself as the fairest.

Why Too Furry?

This WTF of which you speak may need some clarification. Hmmm...what else could it possibly mean?

Then the only topics that get on te main page are ones that would have universal support, and not just a line-up-the-fanboy tally.

Fucking childish bullshit. :grr: The "community" has shown itself incapable of handling it responsibly and maturely. Romper Room for brats.

That would be my number-one DU enhancement request. :)

(rec'd)

We also have "hide thread" so YOU don't have to view the offensive thread. THE LAST FUCKING THING DU NEEDS is an "un-recommend button." If a thread get recommends, that means enough members--just like yourself--considered it important enough to recommend. That is their prerogative. Just as it is yours to ignore it, comment on it or hide it. And remember the thread that you decide to "un-recommend" just might be your thread tomorrow getting "un-recommended" by others. Consider that?

:hi:

:hi:

Best wishes.

We all mean well. And I think we're all frustrated that the DU we know and love has begun to resemble a bad WWF grudge match. This will pass. I take joy in the fact so many are so passionate and clamoring for participation, even if it is the self-absorbed, in-your-face style of political participation.

Bless your heart, and I know it's in the right place. And here's a heart from me. Take care. Your voice is valued.

.... which is the DU cesspool.

This would greatly change the tone of the recommendation system. The system is currently "positive feedback only" - we recommend people and topics we agree with, and there is no method of negative feedback. Implementing a system where we can harm each other's posts will make DU much more confrontational.

There are at least two websites I know of that have similar systems; reddit and digg. Both of those websites are now struggling with cabals of users who vote down anything they disagree with to prevent things from getting high on the board. In other words, this system of voting creates a social problem that nobody really knows how to deal with yet.

It just invites abuse. Hadn't thought about that.

The moderator system works slowly, but it does work.

Problem with a negative rec system is that if someone posted an unpopular opinion, cliques and mobs could dogpile on that post to get it 86'd.

There is nothing less democratic than mob mentality and using it to quash dissent or different ways of thinking, IMO.

are battling it out. It is not a civil war yet, but I fear one.

...I do think that once a nominee is settled upon, it will mostly die down, but the mechanism for de-rec'ing unpopular threads would still be there to be abused by cliques and mobs.

I honestly can't for the life of me figure out why the Obama & Hillary camps are so hell-bent on bringing their vitriol to GD. Why foist it on people that don't want to read it?

I know where GDP is and if I want to read slime about Obama or Hillary, I'll go there. I've already voted in my primary and don't care to hear about it much anymore until the convention.

The idea interested me when I saw this thread, but you are right: the "un-rec" feature would likely remain after the primaries are over, and that cliques and mobs could overtake it is a valid concern.

But it could easily be abused. I was on a forum once where they had up-votes and down-votes. Sometimes they were used as they were supposed to be--to rate the quality of the post. But at other times they were abused and reflected the "popularity" of the poster more than the quality of the post. Therefore a member who wasn't as popular might post a really great piece and because his/her down-votes outweighed the up-votes it appeared it was a bad piece. (There was a color coding system that went along with the ratings. Green was good and red was bad. You wanted to see bright green and avoid dark red.)

IMO just refraining from voting on a bad piece or replying to voice disapproval is good enough. The "alert" function is there as well.

replying in a disapproving voice is not enough control for some. I can see it now, the Democratic Underground Control of Threads To Assinine to Post Everywhere.
The DUCT TAPE Initiative.
DUCT TAPE will solve ALL of our problems. All of them. Or at least hold us together until after the primary season.

And, you know, you don't have to read either.

One hopes that DUers select the threads they read by their titles, not by whether or not they are recommended.

The stories on the Homepage are put there by... don't know, either the moderators or the owners.

I think that you can get a better use of DU if you will concentrate on reading and posting, rather than deciding for others how they should use this site.

other sites have a recommend feature? blow me over with a soft kiss ;-)

Controversial topics always get all kinds of ratings. In the end, the ratings usually say nothing at all about the quality of the post.

Do we really need threads appearing and disappearing randomly, toggling from greatest to not?

Do we want to encourage roving gangs of partisans to try to censor threads?

A plus-minus option turns every thread into a popularity contest and a fight. Recommend is now an option for threads you really like and allows popular minority opinions to be heard. Plus-minus would push everyone into click-clicking every thread instead of posting replies. I've seen it and it turns into a bunch of bullying and defensiveness.

Not only would things get much uglier than they are today, but ultimately the place would turn into an echo chamber for majority opinions, instead of a debate board.

One thing I've thought would be nice would be an option to post in a thread without kicking. That way you can make your disapproval heard without pushing up a thread you can't stand. But how would know the thread had received responses?

Best is probably what already exists. Sometimes I have wished that the "nuclear ignore" experiment had lasted longer than a few hours.

It allowed a greater degree of OP control in the content of a thread without overburdening the mods with additional responsibilities. It was not a surprise that many of the posters who complained the most were obnoxious, high noise ratio types. DU would have become useless to them if that feature had remained.

For the curious, here's the history the DU block function (these are huge threads, FYI):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8240

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=14094

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=31042

sorting by # of recs and # of views. I like the idea of sorting the most RECs to the top.