Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.