What happened to the star ratings?

[LChoy]

Noticed that the threads on CP no longer have star ratings. Just wondering why that was removed

Thanks

[photon]

They were removed because people couldn't handle the responsibility apparently and were using them to grief others.

[photon]

To be more specific, I took a look in the database of who was rating which threads, and there was a group of users who would, almost without fail, en masse, give 1 star ratings to every single thread a particular user started.

Of course the thread star rating is supposed to be to identify good threads, not to be used to grief a person a clique doesn't like.

And asking people to behave in a mature fashion usually doesn't work, and having to police thread ratings is beyond stupid, so it was easier just to remove the system entirely.

This is a strong indication that a "no-thanks" system, or a system to rate other posters or a thumbs up/thumbs down system simply could not work, as there's a group of people who would abuse the system for their own fun rather than use it as it was intended.

As usual, a few spoil it for everyone.

[LChoy]

Thanks for the response to my query. I always seem to miss stuff (or know the stories behind why some posters got binned)

It's too bad, but it outlines one of difficulties of running such a large forum with many viewpoints and polarizing topics. While a "no Thanks" or "=/-" system would be neat, I can definitely see it being abused (every Canuck poster would be unthanked). Imo, even the Thanks system seems to be hit and miss sometimes.

Keep up the good work

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by photon

To be more specific, I took a look in the database of who was rating which threads, and there was a group of users who would, almost without fail, en masse, give 1 star ratings to every single thread a particular user started.

Of course the thread star rating is supposed to be to identify good threads, not to be used to grief a person a clique doesn't like.

And asking people to behave in a mature fashion usually doesn't work, and having to police thread ratings is beyond stupid, so it was easier just to remove the system entirely.

This is a strong indication that a "no-thanks" system, or a system to rate other posters or a thumbs up/thumbs down system simply could not work, as there's a group of people who would abuse the system for their own fun rather than use it as it was intended.

As usual, a few spoil it for everyone.

This is exactly what a no thanks feature's intent should be. It would allow me to voice my displeasure with a poor poster without me getting trouble for derailing a thread.

As for a few people spoiling it for everyone, I'd suggest the crappy posters ruin far more than a small "clique" calling out a crappy poster for their crap. I guess everyone is happier if we just ignore useless threads started by below average posters. God forbid they're held accountable for what they write.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

This is exactly what a no thanks feature's intent should be. It would allow me to voice my displeasure with a poor poster without me getting trouble for derailing a thread.

As for a few people spoiling it for everyone, I'd suggest the crappy posters ruin far more than a small "clique" calling out a crappy poster for their crap. I guess everyone is happier if we just ignore useless threads started by below average posters. God forbid they're held accountable for what they write.

Hmmm. You doth protest too much...

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Did anyone ever use the star ratings anyway?

Glad it is gone. Only purpose was for a few jerks to go around and rate threads of people they didn't like.

Can't say I ever opened up FOI. Looked at a thread title, looked at the rating and said "hmmm. That looks like an interesting topic but a 2 start rating just doesn't cut it for me" or vice versa.

If a thread is good or looks interesting I'll open it. If not I won't. Ratings based on a what random people think provided no value to me.

[photon]

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

This is exactly what a no thanks feature's intent should be. It would allow me to voice my displeasure with a poor poster without me getting trouble for derailing a thread.

Better to not participate in the thread, poor threads fall off the front page and die, good ones persist.

You don't make things better by hitting the bad parts, you make things better by doing things better.

That's like parents who think as long as they punish their kid for everything they do wrong, the kids will turn out good.

Poor threads and posts should either be ignored, or out-competed with good threads.

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

As for a few people spoiling it for everyone, I'd suggest the crappy posters ruin far more than a small "clique" calling out a crappy poster for their crap.

Ah yes, the "someone else did something worse" defense.

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

I guess everyone is happier if we just ignore useless threads started by below average posters. God forbid they're held accountable for what they write.

If people were using the system as intended, voting down poor threads and voting up good ones then you would be right.

However voting down a thread based on WHO posted it rather than the thread's merit defeats the whole point.. a person posting the thread doesn't get positive feedback for the good threads they make, only negative across the board. So then it's not "we don't like this thread", it's "we don't like you".

Which is a destructive clique attitude.

If people don't like a thread, stay out of it.

[CrusaderPi]

So your solution is to stick your head in the sand and ignore the problem? Don't blame the guy making useless redundant threads, blame the guy who pays attention and notices. Fair enough.

Poor threads don't die, they're reborn by the same posters looking for the attention they didn't get from the first thread. You want a parenting parable? It's like a parent who notices a kid does something wrong, but they ignore it because they're certain the problem will just correct itself.

[photon]

Lol, false dilemma and a red herring all mixed into one. Makes it difficult to have a reasonable conversation.

[Yeah_Baby]

I think CP has a mob mentality. This goes beyond any online cliques, real or imagined.

[theonlywhiteout]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

I think CP has a mob mentality. This goes beyond any online cliques, real or imagined.

it really does. i find it hard to participate in the flames/hockey threads because there are roaming gangs of posters who drive by people who they disagree with. its like the scene from anchorman when the different tv stations have a fight.

just post something even questioning kipper or iggy or bouwmeester. no matter if your post is intelligent, thought out, and provides some numbers and analysis to back it up. people will try and come up with zippy one liners to attack you to see how many of his pals will thank him for attacking a valid opinion that they dont agree with

[puckluck]

Originally Posted by theonlywhiteout

it really does. i find it hard to participate in the flames/hockey threads because there are roaming gangs of posters who drive by people who they disagree with. its like the scene from anchorman when the different tv stations have a fight.

just post something even questioning kipper or iggy or bouwmeester. no matter if your post is intelligent, thought out, and provides some numbers and analysis to back it up. people will try and come up with zippy one liners to attack you to see how many of his pals will thank him for attacking a valid opinion that they dont agree with

Do you honestly think this is only a problem at CP?

I challenge you to go to a Oiler message board and bash Eberle and Hall and see what kind of rection you get.

Or go to any message board and say anything negative about the 3 best players on the team. I guarantee you the reaction will be exactly the same as here if not worse.

There are mob mentalities all over the internet when it comes to stupid comments.

And I know this because I hate Bouwmeester and talk trash about him at every chance I get. I think he is over paid and he's the reason the Flames have stumbled since he got here. Do you think that I haven't had my share of people saying I don't understand hockey or I should "watch the games"?

Absolutely, and it's to be expected whether you're on CP or any other message board. People have emotional ties to players and will blindly support their team ANYWHERE on the internet.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I don't even think it is a hockey thing or an internet thing.

People are just more likely to be influenced by the perceived "norm" and tend to follow.

[Boblobla]

MAN, I love the Help Forum.

[FanIn80]

The best part is I thought that whole "omg everyone rates my threads one star" things was just some melodramatic figment of his imagination. I imagine a few people started doing it just because of his rants on the subject. I know I'm guilty of such. I had no idea it was a real thing, though.

Putting that aside, I think the system was pretty borked to begin with. My opinion of a 5-star thread seemed to differ greatly from the mob's definition of the same.

[Frequitude]

Interesting. 1 star threads always caught my eye as a positive thing compared to 0 star thread.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Interesting. 1 star threads always caught my eye as a positive thing compared to 0 star thread.

Agreed, they were the "car wrecks" of CP. You knew you shouldn't look, but you couldn't resist doing I giant rubber neck, that compltely veered you off your intended course.

Oh look, an 5 star thread about a local orphanage volunteer that found a cure for death.... or, 1 star thread about Lololz my fartz smell like grass clippings, hmmm lets see what he had to eat!!?