I think its a worthy idea to try. If you find that people are abusing the rating system or its not teaching the difficult people how to act, then you can simply revert back to this format.
Quick question... Can people rate you Cliff? If so mark me down on your behalf for 5*!!!.
I think my views would best be expressed with a couple of lines from the movie "Army of Darkness" with Bruce Campbell:
"Groovy!"
and, for Cliff:
"Hail to the king, baby!"
The only thing I'd like to add is that any user who is banned should have his "rating" retracted from all the other, still current, users. I.E., you gets the bannage, your vote don't count
Cliff,I think it's a great idea but I also think you should have the final say when someone is voted out. This would prevent someone from being banned just for having an unpopular opinion. It would also prevent a clique from banning someone for not agreeing with their group. What does everyone else think?
------------------ White '85 4cyl coupe Black '86 v-6 SE '81 CB900F Super Sport
Sounds like a good idea to me BUT what I'd like to see is a "Smiles Legend" that would indicate to everyone that I am ignoring a certain post from a certain person. Kinda like below...... let's say the BS legend was the "Ignore" Legend & let's say I want to ignore or not respond to your post.... it would look something like this.....
(beginning of example)
quote
Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: [B][/B]
(end of example)
IMHO, This is the method I would prefer to use to show people that I did see the message.... that I disagree with the message .... and that I choose not to enter that flame war.
After a short time maybe people will get the hint and try to behave like their mother's were watching.
Archie
[This message has been edited by Archie (edited 10-20-2001).]
well, i like the idea, even though some of the flame wars are kinda funny to watch (specifics dont come to mind right now). the thought i had about the whole "who can put in bad ratings and who cant" i thought instead of number of posts, maybe make it that a particular person has to be a memeber for a certain amount of time. that way you dont have some mutant with no life racing up to the 100 or 250 post quota on a new s/n just so they can make their ding on someone they dont like. just a thought. keep up the good work!
Originally posted by ur2biteme: maybe make it that a particular person has to be a memeber for a certain amount of time.
I like that idea. There are a number of members who don't post regularly because they're lurking most of the time or because they stay out of the O/T section (which is, as I understand it, the place to get your post count up ). It wouldn't be entirely fair if they were unable to vote. Maybe we should add a "weight" to a vote. Which means anybody can vote, but the longer you are a member, the more weight your vote carries.
I'll probably have to write this voting system from scratch so don't expect it any time soon yet.
Its not a bad idea Archie except for one thing.... I think one reason the flame wars keep going is the number of people who respond. It keeps the thread up at the top where everyone clicks on it and adds there two cents. Having everyone responding just to put a in it might make it worse, not better. The way they tend to go, maybe it wouldn't matter either. I would think that not posting to it is the best way to deal with it... and if evryone failed to respond the post would quickly go away.
Ok, so I am too idealistic. Go ahead and my post Archie!
I think its a good idea. Im a new member here and it really doesnt seem that bad, but Ive been on another board for years and it is completely out of control. I have to wade through tons of"my car rocks yours dont" posts just to get to the information I want. Now I dont even go there anymore. Thanks to the 99% of members here who have been very helpful and friendly to the newbies!!
Sounds outstanding to me. Can't you just write this in your spare time? Like tonight at 2am????? Ha!Oh yea, when you are done, I'm having a small software problem with my model trains. Can you correct that too??? Good luck. Jim
Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: There are a number of members who don't post regularly because they're lurking most of the time or because they stay out of the O/T section. Maybe we should add a "weight" to a vote. Which means anybody can vote, but the longer you are a member, the more weight your vote carries.
CLIFF YOU HAVE A GREAT SITE!! I READ IT A LOT TO GET TECH INFO AND TO COMPARE PRICES OF CARS AND PARTS! ANYTHING YOU DO SURE SUITS ME. THANKS FOR HAVING THIS AVALIABLE TO US.DO WHAT YOU NEED TO MAKE IT BETTER!
one thing for sure, on my little island. I have no problem with the who self (members) moderated forum idea, but on my end, there is something to look at. My only fear is that the way I am, and the way i write, things get takent the wrong way. its not on purpose, its just that i do my post quick, and sometimes phrase something wrong. this could go against me with the rating system. Another think would be the "oh, you want to go against me" factor, where say Fiero5 decides the the L4 is the better engine for his reasons, but FieroGT1 decided the V6 is better. This type of situation i have found can cause people to rate unfairly if there isnt a manitory fee-back attached to the rating. (yeahsomeone would have to look at all of them if there was an auto f/b, but from the rating system you are talking about, it seems to be the type where you dont like what is being said, black mark them. if you like them, dont rate.) I have been labled as contraversial by a few in my time, because i am fairly bold, and open. if i fell a certain way, i let it known. i also like to wise crack situations, and this has gotten me some wird responces. this is another thing that might get someone a black mark. again i state, i have no problem with the rating system.it sounds like a good idea, im just playing devils advocate, its what im good at. i see a posibility of cliques forming, and dominating the set, but only to the point where "newbies" are floged for not understanding whats going on. im not going to say, that will happen, but again, im looking at it from the other side. someone is going to write in responce to me about this next part, so im writeing it now. we could do this all day, find excuses as to why this can be a problem, and its true, we could. we could also sit here all day and try and find reasons we should. personaly, i think its rather generous of cliff to allow us to give some responcibal f/back on this topic, as it will effect us directly. there are a lot of forums, boards, and other such facilities that woould not give us this chance to voice our opinions such as i like or dislike having the board changed in this way. (or hey, Myke, ur spelling sux; hooked on phonics worked for me) Clif if my 2 cents, ummm wait, this is more like 2 bucks worth, means anything, i say go for it. if a person (like myself), becomes too contravertial, or in other cases poiniently is being a jerk, let them be "voted off the island" as another member said. im not one to jump on the band waggon, but i had to here. oh, one other thing, is off topic going to be part of the rating? it seems some of the off topic is WAY off topic, and it would be a shame to have that area censored, as sometimes it gets real funny (the bathroom string; doughnut string) then again, if it wasnt rated, people might use that area just to burn some biscuts. sorry so long and boring, im not going back to reread this, so i hope i wrote this the way i wanted it
one thing for sure, on my little island. I have no problem with the who self (members) moderated forum idea, but on my end, there is something to look at. My only fear is that the way I am, and the way i write, things get takent the wrong way. its not on purpose, its just that i do my post quick, and sometimes phrase something wrong. this could go against me with the rating system. Another think would be the "oh, you want to go against me" factor, where say Fiero5 decides the the L4 is the better engine for his reasons, but FieroGT1 decided the V6 is better. This type of situation i have found can cause people to rate unfairly if there isnt a manitory fee-back attached to the rating. (yeahsomeone would have to look at all of them if there was an auto f/b, but from the rating system you are talking about, it seems to be the type where you dont like what is being said, black mark them. if you like them, dont rate.) I have been labled as contraversial by a few in my time, because i am fairly bold, and open. if i fell a certain way, i let it known. i also like to wise crack situations, and this has gotten me some wird responces. this is another thing that might get someone a black mark. again i state, i have no problem with the rating system.it sounds like a good idea, im just playing devils advocate, its what im good at. i see a posibility of cliques forming, and dominating the set, but only to the point where "newbies" are floged for not understanding whats going on. im not going to say, that will happen, but again, im looking at it from the other side. someone is going to write in responce to me about this next part, so im writeing it now. we could do this all day, find excuses as to why this can be a problem, and its true, we could. we could also sit here all day and try and find reasons we should. personaly, i think its rather generous of cliff to allow us to give some responcibal f/back on this topic, as it will effect us directly. there are a lot of forums, boards, and other such facilities that woould not give us this chance to voice our opinions such as i like or dislike having the board changed in this way. (or hey, Myke, ur spelling sux; hooked on phonics worked for me) Clif if my 2 cents, ummm wait, this is more like 2 bucks worth, means anything, i say go for it. if a person (like myself), becomes too contravertial, or in other cases poiniently is being a jerk, let them be "voted off the island" as another member said. im not one to jump on the band waggon, but i had to here. oh, one other thing, is off topic going to be part of the rating? it seems some of the off topic is WAY off topic, and it would be a shame to have that area censored, as sometimes it gets real funny (the bathroom string; doughnut string) then again, if it wasnt rated, people might use that area just to burn some biscuts. sorry so long and boring, im not going back to reread this, so i hope i wrote this the way i wanted it
Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: You really don't think I would go through all that trouble for one person, do you?
We've had our share of "difficult" members in the past, and most of them cleaned up their act in time. This is just a way to speed that process up a little.
It's a great idea. It will build a better environment and we'll all learn and appreciate the Forum more. I'm a recent buyer of a Fiero and the posters on this forum help ed me before my decision was made on year and model.
Welp I'm all for that idea but I dont like the idea of just one person being able to reduce ones merit because of a disagreement. How about a number of votes would bring a user down say 7 users of a year or more. that way it's "popular opinion" and not just a single opinion. Even better still in order to kind of "teach" the user how to behave and better the board, have the voters vote to close the offending thread and after say 5 threads closed boot the offender for x days or months or forever. I feel that even the worst boneheads that pass through do have some good input from time to time and should not be banned unless they just don't get it. This forum is great because of the way it's run. You can post just about anything you want in the various forums within reason but people being different may find some things more offensive than others. Take the Earth sucks thread some will find it totaly useless but several find it facinating but if 5 votes find it useless than buh bye and thats not right.
Originally posted by 84Bill: Welp I'm all for that idea but I dont like the idea of just one person being able to reduce ones merit because of a disagreement. How about a number of votes would bring a user down say 7 users of a year or more. that way it's "popular opinion" and not just a single opinion. Even better still in order to kind of "teach" the user how to behave and better the board, have the voters vote to close the offending thread and after say 5 threads closed boot the offender for x days or months or forever. I feel that even the worst boneheads that pass through do have some good input from time to time and should not be banned unless they just don't get it. This forum is great because of the way it's run. You can post just about anything you want in the various forums within reason but people being different may find some things more offensive than others. Take the Earth sucks thread some will find it totaly useless but several find it facinating but if 5 votes find it useless than buh bye and thats not right.
this is the basis of my arguement, the fear that i might say somthing to get someone peved and have them start bating me on the voting. this could pose a problem, where as i mean no harm, yet, sometimes i have been labled as contravetial. i just like to stir up peoples minds, a HEALTHY CONTROLED argument almost always opens minds and brings out peoples creativity. but on the other hand, you try to stir up someones mind, get them to thing, and they decide you are attacking them (this happened to me on the Fiero-List twice now. i was trying to educate myself, and someone took it as an insult) this is the sort of thing im talking about as a problem, how can this be avoided (i know, shut my mouth, right?) the idea behind the forum (correct me if im wrong cliff) is to alow others to share and create, as well as educate self and others. a message board with input. I just would hate to see this turn into a cliquish society, where you either fit, or get booted. i think that is a fair concern. please feel free to coment on my words, and PLEASE quote me if your doing so, i would love to be able to explain my concers in deeper detail, if warranted Myke
Cliff, There's a lot of good points made on this forum. I would hate to be removed from your forum cause I r Hillbilly and I too come across differently than most folks. I think you have a good idea and I'm sure you can work out a good way to rate folks. I use this forum to improve my communication with folks from all over and I would hate to be kicked out of school before I got a wuppin'!
Now to put what I just said more directly (One Translation).
There is much knowlegde on this site. I do not want to be removed due to discrimination. You have the intelligence to impliment this idea fairly. There is much to be learned on this forum including manners. Give anyone fair notice to learn better before you kick anyone off.
Above is a good example of how I could get something misconstrued.
At first I liked the idea of rating members but more and more I think about it the more I'm not sure.
Is there a way we could have a complaint system?
For example, lets say 3 complaints from three different members are filed against another member. Maybe have radio buttons with specific reasons like, uses offensive language, intimidating threats, maybe an "other" section where you'd type in a form box the complaint, etc.
After three of such are filed, the member getting the complaints is notified that he/she is on probation. Any more complaints, ohhh within the next month, and that user is subject to being banned.
In my opinion and the way I would use the system is if someone is calling so and so every name under the sun they can come up with which is uncalled for; belittling/berating the individual for the sole purpose of their own amusement or just because another individual shared an opinion and/or view on a topic; posting a thread for the sole purpose of starting an argument; just to name a few.
I guess it is one thing to be constructive and provide worth while feedback; be able to get into an argument/flame war and yet at the same time be able to maintain a mutual respect for the others opinions and/or views on a topic versus destructive and subsequently belittling any individual on petty things within a post or the issues at hand "just because they can".
In the end, we are all adults here and can respectfully determine when something is out of line to make an informed decision as well as vote.
Or as the adage goes, "What goes around...comes around".
I think if a voting system is incorporated and lets say the rating (Positive or Negative) is listed somehow graphically under the users moniker, that individual will be able to see a general feedback from others on either the thread at hand or overall if others do not wish to get involved in a (any) topic by posting, but have the ability to submit a vote anonamously that provides anonomoyse feedback that others do or do not see that individuals view and it is either favorored or not favored among the rest of the PFF community so that individual has an opportunity to make changes in the way they interact with others.
That's just my feeling on the subject. DEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP!
"In my opinion and the way I would use the system is if someone is calling.." ".. every name under the sun they can come up with which is uncalled for; belittling/berating the individual for the sole purpose of their own amusement.." "..individual shared an opinion and/or view on a topic; posting a thread for the sole purpose of starting an argument; just to name a few."
I guess it is one thing to be constructive and provide worth while feedback; be able to get into an argument/flame war and yet at the same time be able to maintain a mutual respect for the others opinions and/or views on a topic versus destructive and subsequently belittling any individual on petty things within a post or the issues at hand "just because they can".
In the end, we are all adults here and can respectfully determine when something is out of line to make an informed decision as well as vote.
Or as the adage goes, "What goes around...comes around".
I think if a voting system is incorporated and lets say the rating (Positive or Negative) is listed somehow graphically under the users moniker, that individual will be able to see a general feedback from others on either the thread at hand or overall if others do not wish to get involved in a (any) topic by posting, but have the ability to submit a vote anonamously that provides anonomoyse feedback that others do or do not see that individuals view and it is either favorored or not favored among the rest of the PFF community so that individual has an opportunity to make changes in the way they interact with others.
That's just my feeling on the subject. DEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPP!
ok, i see we are on the same level, but we are not all on the same level, no disrespect to anyone. i wish it was as simple as what goes around comes around. in the past i have seen, more that once, someone getting "blasted" for absolutly nothing, or just because someone was upset at a coment someone said. this is what im talking about, these type of things, and i will agree if you say i havent been here long enough to know the member well enough to make the "un-named" accusation. true as it is, we have all encountered the unlikly jerk who decides they just dont like you, and that is the jerk that i have been hypothisizing about. i am not saying anyone here is like this, as i have not seen it, but i am saying it does happen, and lets, for the sake of argument, say i am that jerk. i complain about you 4 or 5 times by picking apart what you have said, and complaing that what you have said is offencive to me, and i have tried to talk to you about it (say outside the forum)and you refuse to stop your bantering. now you have been ousted, and for what? nothing, some jerk (me in this case) decided he didnt like you. the only reason this came up for me, was i got blasted for a coment i made to a mailing list that was harmless, and got contacted by the coordinators about it. the stament was a simple "i dont like this, no thank you" statment, but was told to the coordnators that she felt i was bashing her for her belifes, and i was degragating her by talking to her as i did. does the above stament look to be loaded? i dont think so, it wasnt meant to be as such, but it was an interpitation..... i feel like im being long winded again, so i will cut this short, basical, im saying not everyone can "act their age," not everyone is as horribal as they are made out to be, and when these two meet, there might be a "black balling" of an inocent. i wish, hope and pray this is never an issue, i was just raiseing a point about a posibal situation.
sorry about the spelling, never tried to write, only tried to speak eliquently.
again, sorry about the length, Myke
Ps, dont take this as an attack on anyone, like it is partialy stated, i have run into great people only here, im actualy so happy with the forum, i have brought a few new people to it. peace
i have seen on saome sites where you get a warning, then temporary ban, then permanent. make it something like that, so someone has at least a chance to think about how retarted they are, and come back. people can change, most of them just need a cattle prod and a punch to the gut to do so.
Cliff, What if someone just like to read and not flood the forum with questions? I have given my two cents to some questions, but I like too read and learn sometimes too. Would my rateing go down if I don't answer questons? Most items can be found in the search. I do see alot of repete questions. Do what you feel is nessary. I will back up the dission.
So what happens if I just don't like you period? I hammer away at you by voting, maybe I can convince some of my holmies to do the same because we are tight? Eventually you will get the boot. Not a good way to do things if you ask me but that the power and it can be used for good and evil intent.
The whole vote thing sounds a little too 'Survivor' to me. Majority rule is not always a good thing. Sometimes the pack mentality kicks in and someone could wind up banned when someone with a more objective view might have appropriately let them off with a warning.
We don't need to vote to have you ban an obvious troll. So far, anyone else that might have been banned under this system has shown signs of improvement either when they find out exactly how unpopular their comments are or when warned by you.
The only suggestion I would make would be for you to "clean up" hijacked threads when you warn someone. Some valuable reading sometimes gets lost amongst the .
It seems David and the gent above him (i hope your male, but if not sorry, i dont remeber the name on the prior post)are on the same track as i am. A thought has come across my little mind, a way to moderate the "booting" of a member. when someone has been booted, or "warned" because of message, or comment, and in some case the lack of adiquit amounts of either.(you know, the messages of ) if the message was sent to the offender in a form the can not be edited, that says something like, hey, jerk, you did this, "bla bla" and were reported for the content of it, you rating has gone down to XXX if you wish to contest, press "this" button. then it would send it back for reveiw, giving this person a fair chance to keep their name good. the problems with this are simple to figure out. Cliff, this will add work for you. every person who sends a message back to you would have to be read, evaluated, then adjusted as aplicable for the content. therefor my idea may be just beyond feasable (but it would also show you what people, if any, are falsly sending negative markings.)if you went into 10 of these a day, and all ten had my name as the complainee, and seemed to be invalid complaints, obviously im the jerk, not the accused.(useing myself for sake of arguement) sorry, minds just spinning again. anyhow, i will allow you all to get to some other things, as i have to cook dinner. Myke
Originally I said if my vote counts, to go ahead and do it. Maybe what I could have said instead is, Cliff, you have my vote. What that means is that ultimately, whatever you decide is probably going to be ok by me. Obviously you have been contemplating the need for some kind of "ratings" system, or you wouldn't have started this thread.
Personally, I believe in communication. There are too many people in one place here to always agree on everything. Two people in one place long enough gives you the same circumstance! In the words of a Ricky Nelson song; "You can't please everyone, so ya got to please yourself.".
Ebay does it and people either comply, disappear, or start over. If you want to spend the time that it will take to write the program that will give us this system, then it has to be because you have been tested once too often by an unthinking or immature member, and have reached the conclusion that the "banning tool" has to be available. I can understand from several different viewpoints why you wouldn't want to carry this power alone. Thing is...you do.
If there were an individual that you just didn't want to be here any more, it is within your capacity to make it happen. Your integrity and wisdom(beyond your years it seems at times, to me) have been proven through your own words and actions. Everybody here (with the possible exception of new members) has been witness to it at one time or another. What you are proposing could be compared to a form of self governing that sometimes works very well, and sometimes not. Kind of depends on who the people are, the rules made and who makes them, among other things.
Going back to the communication issue, you have given us private messaging, which allows any individual to communicate with any other individual, about anything they like, including everything from varying viewpoints, to out and out bashing of one another. When somebody brings a passionately felt response to the open forum, generally it is because they are looking for support or verification for what they are saying. Some folks believe that getting your point across is more important than whether your point is valid or not. Another symptom of what I refer to as "Me-itis" We all have it, just with different manifestations and to varying degrees.
If all were as willing to at least consider another's perspective, there might not be arguments, but rather healthy exchanges of knowledge and information. However...we are all at different levels most of the time. That's as it has to be, nobody can change that. The situation is a basic one as I see it. It's the situation that makes somebody throw the first punch instead of working the problem out. The only form of communication that some of us understand is force. Not a new problem.
I think the rules you outline in the forum opening page, should have covered about everything that needed covered to govern people's actions in your house, but that's obviously, sometimes, painfully not the case.
Just rambling on some thoughts on the matter at hand since it seems to have garnered a fair amount of attention.
I could go on and on, but to what end? I will at this point just rephrase my original response to read..."If it counts, and Cliff wants to do it...do it."
Only things I can suggest are to make it 2-way. Positive, AND negative feedback.
Also, don't automate user removal. If a person crosses the threshold, script it to email you or any other moderators (you are the only one, right?), this would lessen the abuse factor.
Maybe consider linking the rating system to particular posts, and to "brand" the vote to a particular post. That way, you can inventory what the complaints are about, and making the final decision based on that. This would remove some of the potential for abuse by adding an accountability factor. anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of Cliff
It seems that most people here agree with Cliff and we need some sort of rating system. I agree as well, and Mach10 made a good point above, about the sytem not being automated.
I think that the "banned" users should only be banned for a certain amount of time. Kinda like being put in jail so that they can think about the crimes that they have commited. I don't think it's fair to ban someone for life, unless they said a lot of REALLY hainous stuff. And as to how long should they be "banned" for, I think that you (Cliff) would be able to decide that fairly, or you can have a jury vote as to how long they should be banned and take an average of that.
I like the positive and negative feedback idea as opposed to a number rating system because you don't just assign someone a number, you make a comment and it gets left in the negative/positive feedback area that everyone else can red. And I think that once the amount of your negative feedback gets like say 5 more negatives over your total amount of positives, then they should get banned for whatever period of time.
My biggest point in this is that I don't think it would be fair for people to get banned for life. I think they should just be put in the corner to think about what they have done.
Cliff I've given this some thought before I sent this reply. I think it's a good idea if done right. I think a 3 strikes and your out system would work. 1st a warning ,2nd banned for a month ,3rd gone for good. This will give a person every chance to clean up his act before being banned.
Cliff I've given this some thought before I sent this reply. I think it's a good idea if done right. I think a 3 strikes and your out system would work. 1st a warning ,2nd banned for a month ,3rd gone for good. This will give a person every chance to clean up his act before being banned.
I think this is a great idea, especially for marking people (i could go on to mention several people i disrespect) as traitors to the fiero community...F13r0z R0x!
------------------ Tyler Morgan, 1986 GT Aftermarket Power Steering, Rebuilt motor with >100 miles! Aim=FieroDriver1986
[This message has been edited by Kasdan (edited 10-27-2001).]
i vote YES! i was looking at the replies, and there was a couple make an anonymous vote. and there was another that i saw,
I know from past emails I had received (don't ask how or why), many people had shared with me how they felt, but were afraid to post because they feared they would be retaliated against or ridiculed by others for their opinion or view on the topic.
could we make a anonymous name that anyone can use for when they want to say something and dont want to be scared to say it? EX if i want to say something, and i dont want people to know who i am, so i could go under the anonymous name and post it so no one could tell who i am? does that make sense? cause i know a couple people who will not post because they know people will come back and.... ect. anyways, i dont even know if you could do that. You would have to make it where they sign in as there name, and then make it anonymous so that you could tell if someone u booted did it.... just an idea i would like to request..... Thanx JAson
Looks like this is would be the last time you see me coment on this subject! (stop cheering!!!) The last few resoponces have the ideas that a few other members and I might find very fitting (sorry for talking for you, just got the same feel from the others) The idea of not having the removal automatated sound more than fair. it would give us the chance to null out the "gang wars" or what have you, also allowing the mamber in question to be "tried" fairly. This idea is very good. Three stikes your out, this would have to be part of the rating anyhow. If i screwed up once and got booted, this would be too hash, as i might have made a misake in how i phrased someing, or just wrote something different than i meant. for the 3 stirkes,it would be as if I flew off the handle at, say Fiero5, he reports me, then I would have a waring for this. If i do it againg, theres strike two, and the aplicable punishment. If there was a stike three, then obviously, either im not bright enough to bite my tounge and act my age, or im not adult enough to understand what i did wrong, and dont deserve to be here. actually, if this was the car, i am more than likely too young to drive anyway, and shouldnt be here. like i said, stop cheering, i think this whole thing with the rating comes with good intentions, and i hope this new system works very good for all of us (who are mature enough to handle owning a Fiero, and interacting with others)Cliff asked us about the rating system, as im sure clif is watching our posts, and concidering our saninty, he no doubt sees the problems and just wants to negate them to make the experiance more pleasureable to all of us. Thus, if i post this thread again, it will not be with opinion, but with subjestions to help make this already enjoyable forum, a little nicer for all of us.
