Originally posted by wittywonkaWho really cares? If a post has 5 thumbs up does it make it a good post or just a post where the writers bum chums give him/her a thumbs up?
Why exactly were limits abolished, again? Surely a limit of 30-50/month would be sufficient and would still prevent certain users from giving thumbs-down to [b]every single post they disagreed with (see the Debates Forum)?[/b]
Same goes for a post with 5 thumbs down.
The only thing that matters is the content of the post not whether is has been thumbed or not.
Originally posted by adramforall1) It's still annoying, whether or not it is relevant.
Who really cares? If a post has 5 thumbs up does it make it a good post or just a post where the writers bum chums give him/her a thumbs up?
Same goes for a post with 5 thumbs down.
The only thing that matters is the content of the post not whether is has been thumbed or not.
2) It takes away from the purpose of a forum. If you like a person's post, then you should engage the discussion and explain why. If you don't like a person's post, then you should engage the discussion and explain why not.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12472
07 Oct 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaThat is an argument - and not an incogent one - against forum ratings per se, not an argument for limiting their number.
2) It takes away from the purpose of a forum. If you like a person's post, then you should engage the discussion and explain why. If you don't like a person's post, then you should engage the discussion and explain why not.
Richard
Originally posted by wittywonkaEveryone's purpose for participating in the various fora may not be the same as yours.
1) It's still annoying, whether or not it is relevant.
2) It takes away from the purpose of a forum. If you like a person's post, then you should engage the discussion and explain why. If you don't like a person's post, then you should engage the discussion and explain why not.
Are you suggesting that your rationale is more important than theirs?
There are options of not going to the fora if it annoys you too badly.
12 Oct 11
Originally posted by Shallow BlueI'll grant that every now and then a person may not have a substantive contribution--or may even have a simpler reason, such as not having enough time--to reply to the post directly. But I think that implicit trust that was assumed would accompany the elimination of ratings limits has been abused.
That is an argument - and not an incogent one - against forum ratings per se, not an argument for limiting their number.
Richard
14 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by PhlabibitBy all means, shatter my ignorance. Please.
Ignore him, everyone's purpose for posting in these forums is exactly the same as yours.
(sips water)
If you are "posting in these forums," what possible purpose could you have other than to initiate or contribute to a discussion?
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12472
16 Oct 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaDepends on the forum and the thread. In some cases, I just enjoy myself having a chat. In this forum specifically, I'm here to consider, and then agree, disagree, or be neutral on, Site Ideas which come from other people. (I have some of my own, but they're trivial.)
By all means, shatter my ignorance. Please.
If you are "posting in these forums," what possible purpose could you have other than to initiate or contribute to a discussion?
Richard
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16953
16 Oct 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaCan i get a T there Bob.
By all means, shatter my ignorance. Please.
If you are "posting in these forums," what possible purpose could you have other than to initiate or contribute to a discussion?
I'd like an R there Bob
Give me a O there Bob
Me wants a L there Bob
And a final L there Bob