Lack of Interest Let members remove or promote content based on post ratings (1 Viewer)

Is this a good idea?


  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
So despite a lot of bullshit drama, two things were produced from this thread:


First, is that we should look into giving people power to promote or smite posts using the post rating system. This can definitely be accomplished, although it will take some time for me to get set up properly. The way I see this happening is setting the post ratings system to hide posts that receive a certain number of negative ratings (i.e. 10) and maybe even promote threads to our 'best of' section (say, 20 positive votes).

Hidden posts can still be viewed by clicking on the 'show post' link where the post was automatically collapsed/hidden by the system. Promoted threads will end up in the 'Best of StP' section so they don't get buried under less useful threads. It should be noted that staff will still be able to promote good content without it necessarily reaching 20 positive ratings. It should also be noted that for a thread to 'automatically promote' to the Best of StP section, it needs to get 20 positive votes on the first post in the thread, not any comments following it (this is a limitation of the forum software). So unfortunately, posts inside a thread cannot be promoted to the Best of StP section.

The only problem with this is users are generally extremely hesitant to give other users negative post ratings, and other users freak out when they get a negative rating, kind of treating it like a personal attack. My idea for negating this is by encouraging users to rate posts both negatively and positively as they see fit and make it clear it's not personal. I think one way of doing this would be by bringing back the 'trophies' system, where we used to get little badges for certain amount of posts in a forum, getting a certain amount of positive ratings on your content, etc. Although I'd probably rename it the badges system and make each one a more 'punk/traveler' version of a scout merit badge. Theoretically, you could get badges for giving negative ratings, but that's a dangerous slope to someone just posting poop ratings on everything in sight, but it's a thought.

It also occurs to me that we'll probably need to add/remove some post ratings in order to give enough / appropriate ratings for this new system.

So I'm starting this new thread to get away from the other one and keep things on topic, and also to make a poll for people to vote on.

The second item that came out of the above thread was giving users the ability to vote on user bans laid down by the staff and potentially reverse them. We'll address that in a new thread located here:


In the meantime is the above a good idea? Vote in the poll and discuss it here (poll will close in 14 days and you can change your vote any time before then).
 
Last edited:
Click here to buy one of our amazing custom bandanas!

TheUndeadPhoenix

The Necromancer King
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
555
Location
Brooklyn (but not hipster Brooklyn)
Website
instagram.com
Hiding posts with too many negative votes feels too reddit-y for me and I'm against that. However, allowing people to push things to Best Of would be great. How would you prevent both from happening at the same time though? A post could receive 10 negatives and 20 positives. Maybe make it so things pushed to best of have X more positive votes than negative.

I miss the trophy system, I'm in favor of bringing it back. Make the stuff based off of receiving instead of giving, that would prevent gaming the system. Though, there might be a constructive way to game the system for negative votes. An unpopular opinion thread where people can agree or disagree with somebody's take. Nothing too controversial obviously but you feel where I'm coming from.
 
OP
Matt Derrick

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
A post could receive 10 negatives and 20 positives. Maybe make it so things pushed to best of have X more positive votes than negative.
promotion would be based on overall score, so negatives would take away from the positives, etc. tbh tho we rarely have posts that reach more than 5 negative ratings, so for a post to get 10 it would probably have to be a really nasty comment (usually racism or misogyny, etc) to get 10 negative ratings, and at that point it's probably not worth reading (meaning, it's okay to hide it). that's just my take on it.
 

Older Than Dirt

I'm a d-bag and got banned.
Banned
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
537
Age
61
Location
Upstate
There is a thing i have wondered about since i noticed it: the "Neutral" ratings seem like they are all either actually positive or negative.

How is it that "Agree" is not a "Positive" rating, and that "Disagree" is not a "Negative" rating?

"Sad" and "Meh" also do not seem "Neutral" to me. "Confusing" seems like it could be neutral, if the post is about a topic that is confusing- or it could be that that the post is confusing, which is the intent of considering it negative on i think.

It is interesting that, since i mentioned in an exchange of PMs with mods that i was the fifth highest rated non-mod participant on the site's "Highest reaction score" page, i'm not any more. Other rankings have also been re-shuffled.

I am a broken man. But curious how this number is calculated, and why the rankings changed recently?
 
OP
Matt Derrick

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
There is a thing i have wondered about since i noticed it: the "Neutral" ratings seem like they are all either actually positive or negative.

How is it that "Agree" is not a "Positive" rating, and that "Disagree" is not a "Negative" rating?

"Sad" and "Meh" also do not seem "Neutral" to me. "Confusing" seems like it could be neutral, if the post is about a topic that is confusing- or it could be that that the post is confusing, which is the intent of considering it negative on i think.

It is interesting that, since i mentioned in an exchange of PMs with mods that i was the fifth highest rated non-mod participant on the site's "Highest reaction score" page, i'm not any more. Other rankings have also been re-shuffled.

I am a broken man. But curious how this number is calculated, and why the rankings changed recently?
So here's the breakdown from the backend of the software:

screenshot_2020-05-18-reactions-squat-the-planet-admin-control-panel-png.55639


agree/disagree/sad/meh were designed so users could have some ratings that didn't effect someone's overall rating score. basically to avoid 'yes men' patting each other on the back and creating echo chambers of people agreeing and allowing for some disagreement without shitting all over the person being disagreed with (i.e. giving them a bunch of negative points).

an update must have messed with the settings because confusing and stupid are definitely supposed to be negative (marked neutral in the screen shot) and like and love it were also marked neutral and i don't know how that would have happened. i haven't checked these settings in years since i didn't really have a reason to.

so there's going to be some recounting of likes going on here over the next day or so because it's going to take a few hours for the software to go through every post on the site and recalculate based on the changes i just made (anything in negative category is negative, anything in positive category is positive).

if there's any changes we make in the future the system will again need a while to recalculate the scores based on the changes made.

it should also be noted that every vote is 1 point, although that could be changed (i.e. stupid could be 10 points while everything else is 1) if folks felt it was necessary.
 
OP
Matt Derrick

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
an example of the 'sad' rating would be using it for an obituary to express condolences without the need to post, but also not giving the OP a negative rating for creating the thread which would obviously discourage further postings of that type.
 

Stiv Rhodes

Wanderer
Joined
Dec 14, 2013
Messages
109
Age
36
Location
Bremerton, WA
I think "angry" gets used toward the post's subject matter more often than the post it's self, much like the "sad" rating. "Good luck" seems to be given to posts talking about a dilemma or seeking help, but have nothing to do with the quality of the post. "Meh" seems to get used on posts that are boring or lack substance. If it was up to me, I'd make "angry" and "good luck" neutral and "meh" negative. Otherwise, cool idea.
 
OP
Matt Derrick

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
I think "angry" gets used toward the post's subject matter more often than the post it's self, much like the "sad" rating. "Good luck" seems to be given to posts talking about a dilemma or seeking help, but have nothing to do with the quality of the post. "Meh" seems to get used on posts that are boring or lack substance. If it was up to me, I'd make "angry" and "good luck" neutral and "meh" negative. Otherwise, cool idea.
I'm definitely open to adding, removing, or changing the category of any of the post ratings as people see fit; I'd like to see more people's opinions on this to get a better idea of what would be most appropriate.
 
OP
Matt Derrick

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
well, it's been two weeks so the poll is finished; surprisingly, the results are inconclusive, so i'm retiring this suggestion for now.
 
OP
Matt Derrick

Matt Derrick

Semi-retired traveler
Staff member
Admin
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
10,043
Location
Austin, TX
Website
youtube.com
Do you like the idea Matt? I feel pretty open to it, I just don't have a super strong opinion so i put undecided but i could really go either way personally.
i mean, I like the idea, but if no one is into it or going to participate in it (as shown by this poll) then there's no sense in me putting in the work to make it happen.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

About us

  • Squat the Planet is the world's largest social network for misfit travelers. Join our community of do-it-yourself nomads and learn how to explore the world by any means necessary.

    More Info

Support StP!

Donations go towards paying our monthly server fees, adding new features to the website, and occasionally putting a burrito in Matt's mouth.

Total amount
$115.00
Goal
$100.00

Monthly Goals

  1. Paying the Bills
    $50.00 of $50.00 - reached!
    The first $50 in donations go towards paying our monthly server fees and adding new features to the website. Once this goal is reached, we'll see about feeding Matt that burrito.
  2. Buy Matt a Beer
    $75.00 of $75.00 - reached!
    Now that we have the bills paid for this month, let's give Matt a hearty thank you by buying him a drink for all the hard work he's done for StP. Hopefully his will help keep him from going insane after a long day of squishing website bugs.
  3. Feed Matt a Burrito
    $100.00 of $100.00 - reached!
    Now that the bills are paid and Matt has a beer in his hand, how about showing him your love by rewarding all his hard work with a big fat burrito to put in his mouth. This will keep him alive while programming new features for the website.
  4. Finance the Shopping Cart
    $115.00 of $200.00
    Now that the bills are paid and Matt is fed, perhaps it's time to start planning for those twilight years under the bridge... if only he had that golden shopping cart all the oogles are bragging about these days.