Skip to main content

View Diary: DailyKos Community Standards: Ratings Abuse (417 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks for this ... (3.87)
    ...I follow this approach with "4"s all the time: It may be a post you disagree with strongly; if it is still a well-said argument, it still deserves credit. You can count the other numbers I've assigned in the past six months on one hand.

    We don't inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - David Brower

    by Meteor Blades on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 01:46:50 PM PST

    •  Thanks (3.75)
      I generally loathe diaries about diaries, but it just seems time to re-introduce people to the swim rules at the side of the pool.

      (And welcome to all you new dKos members.  Your presence here is much appreciated; we have lots to do over the next months and years, and the more people, the better.)

      •  Threes (4.00)
        Thanks for a refresher course for those who've been around for a while, and a primer for those who haven't.  

        Now that folks can recognize what would be negative ratings abuse, you can also recognize what I think is a valuable use of a "3" rating: to counteract unfair 0's, 1's and 2's.  I almost never rate--in the 14-15 months since the site shifted to scoop, I've probably not rated more than 40 times, but probably half of my ratings were threes doled out to comment that had unfairly vanished or were in danger of vanishing, yet weren't deserving of a 4.  

        But other than that, I agree, the 3 (and even a 2) are of some value, but the value is marginal.  

        •  3 (3.80)
          3 is also a good "back handed compliment."

          I'll confess to giving 3s occasionally to someone I disagree with who also combines some troll-like qualities or personal attacks in their argument.

          Its a "mixed" rating for me, often.

          Say someone makes a pretty well-reasoned argument but also calls me or others names, "3" is a good way to deal with this.

          We all know a 3 is a "blah" rating, but the guidelines say "3" is "good."

          •  I didn't know it (none)
            I thought 3 was "good" and 4 was "excellent."

            Sorry to anyone I may have offended with my 3's.

          •  Close (3.66)
            I actually give out 3s, and for the inverse of a 2's relationship to the 1s (the opposite of the you're on thin ice concept). It means, to me anyway, that a post was especially close to being a 4 but was just missing a small additional point or clarification to complete it. I use it to say "you're on the right track" or "flush out that idea further."

            Of course sometimes it means I don't care for the poster but have to give them some props for a good post.

            My 3s could also mean it was a good post conceptually but lazy grammar and poor spelling.

            (The posters will be left to figure out which they fall into)

            The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing, they tell us how the media is doing.

            by Thumb on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 09:02:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  The 2 (none)
          is a rating I actually use rather often (rarely use 1 or 0) as a way of indicating where boundaries are and what an "iffy" or risky direction is.

          In a democratic society some are guilty, but all are responsible. -Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel

          by a gilas girl on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 09:11:47 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  thanks (4.00)
        not rating at all, but replying instead, is always an option, especially if you disagree.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 02:27:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes (3.50)
          Rating someone because you agree with or disagree with them is a lazy ass thing to do.  Much better is to write a reply comment.  I will give a 4 to someone I agree with (or sometimes disagree with) if the comment contains a new idea I haven't seen or heard before, even if it isn't particularly well said or argued.  It's good to encourage creativity.

          This aggression will not stand, man

          by kaleidescope on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 03:37:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I reply a thousand more times than I rate (none)
          anyone. I, like Bliss, thought that 3 was pretty good-like a B+; 4, than would be A. So, Now I know better. Thanks for going over the rules.

          A is for posts I learn something from and/or whose prose I admire (and usually agree with).Have given perhaps one 1 to someone who was obnoxious and offensive to me and probably to others.

          Have been downrated for daring to criticize Kerry for having said he would have done the same thing blah, blah, for his orange tan, and for his following the wild goose. All before the election. It's just that I really cared about him and wanted him to look and do well.

          Yesterday....well, I'm still confused about the money thing, but am afraid I reacted angrily without consideration of others. For that I'm sorry. But I'm still confused. Though less emotional.

          •  Sounds like "rating inflation" to me (none)
            It seems that I also have been corrected, by the author of the comment which began this thread.

            Silly me, I also thought that a 3 meant "good" and a 4 "excellent".  

            It's a good thing that I haven't been rating comments for more than a month.

            What have you done today to take Bush and the Bushies down?

            by JTML on Mon Nov 29, 2004 at 04:10:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  hi-larious! (3.33)
        that someone gave you a 3 rating in the tip jar.

        thanks for worthwile post, especially for lurkers like me.

        America would have been better off with four years of Ralph Wiggum

        by LeftCoaster on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 02:36:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sorry, I couldn't help myself... (none)
          I gave you a "3" for no other reason than that I thought it was kind of funny.

          But I wanted to balance it out, so I went and gave you a bunch of 4's on your last diary (w/ comments).

          Hopefully the average will work out.  If not, well, hatred of math is why I went to law school.  ;)

          "Let us rid ourselves of the fiction that low oil prices are somehow good for the United States." -- Dick Cheney

          by William S Martin on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 05:19:01 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Mr. Martin (none)
            Are you now clear on the use of rating?  As several people pointed out to you last night, your drive-by troll ratings of us you didn't agree with (and your 4s for the misogynist poster you did agree with) were inappropriate.  

            I hope you have gone back to adjust them appropriately.  Thanks.

            Still waiting for the next Great Vowel Shift.

            by lightiris on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 06:33:54 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  nothing wrong (none)
            with a little bit of irony..

            America would have been better off with four years of Ralph Wiggum

            by LeftCoaster on Fri Nov 19, 2004 at 04:31:44 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  a wonderful promotion idea... (none)
        i would like to mail dKos floaties to new swimmers.

        i need them after being drowned for my opinions in the kerry finance post fiasco.

        theorist and proud

        by a lynn on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 05:06:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  As a new member (none)
        I am a longtime Slashdot reader, so I am quite used to the system there.

        But when you have problems such as this, and must write diaries about it, it is indicative of the fact that the system itself is not well designed. If twos and threes should rarely be given, then why do they exist? Shouldn't the system be simplified?

        How about just three ratings: insightful, troll, and funny. Insightful or funny get the user a +1, and a troll rating gets them a -1.

        Also, implement a rule that you can not rate posts in which you are replying. If you are in the thread, then your ratings should be wiped out.

        This makes it simple to understand, even for newbies. You'll always have the problem of voting up posts people agree and disagree with, but this minimizes the impact.

      •  So in other words, we shouldn't be concerned... (none)
        ...about voter abuse in the 2004 election, but we should be concerned with ratings abuse on Daily Kos?
        •  Much easier to (none)
          prove ratings abuse on dKos.

          Some folks have the investigations and the proof down to a science (here on dKos I mean).


          That's one place where the Democratic party and the election integrity people really could learn something from reading dKos.

           btw -- I'm joking...

          In a democratic society some are guilty, but all are responsible. -Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel

          by a gilas girl on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 09:53:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Wise-ass rating on comment (3.33)
      I think pdc90dem4clark is trying to be a wise-ass with the "3" rating on your post.

      "Those who betray the trust...are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors." - George HW Bush

      by DavidW in SF on Thu Nov 18, 2004 at 04:07:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm so glad you addressed this... (none)
      being new to commenting and posting in the blogoshere, could you help me with something?

      How do you rate a diary? or do you do this by the "recommend" feature, and only rate the comments?
      also what is and where do I find "tips" or "tip jars"?
      I looked under FAQ'S and couldn't find anything about these questions, and I didn't want to post a diary about, or ask about it in the middle of other discussions!

      One more thing...I've been rating comments with the number and then hitting the "rate all" button. Is this correct?

      "The best principles of our republic, secure to all it's citizens a perfect equality of rights" Thomas Jefferson

      by redstateliberal on Fri Nov 19, 2004 at 09:19:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Long time users please reply to this (none)
        Someone please answer these questions.  I have the same questions.
      •  Some quick answers: (none)
        You can't rate a diary.  That's probably a bad thing, and a solution will probably be introduced at some point, but for now you can only rate comments.

        That's where "tip jars" come in.  A "tip jar" is a comment placed by the author of the diary in the comments of that diary.  The purpose is to say "hey, if you liked that diary -- or if you thought it was crap -- rate it here."  So the "tip jar" exists as a community convention; rate the "tip jar"comment to rate the diary itself.  Most of the time, again by convention, people simply use the first comment by the diary's author to rate the diary, whether the author explicitly labels it "tip jar" or not.

        Ratings are often called "tips" because in practice, "4"s are the only ratings commonly given.  If you want to "tip" someone, give them a "4".  If you think their diary was horrible, and want to warn them that they are operating far outside the bounds of what discourse here should be, give them a "1".  Or maybe a "2", if they're close to the line, but didn't cross it.

        Don't put "3"s in tip jars unless you mean it.  Most people will take a "3" as a backhanded complement at best.  If you don't believe the diary was special, simply don't rate it at all.

        •  thanks... (none)
          for replying!  I was hoping to learn all this one day.  I have been just stumbling through and learning what I can along the way.  I'm afraid technology is moving faster than this 46 yr old can manage to keep up with! LOL (learned this last year in a chat room) (wink)lol. (don't know how to make the little smiley wink thingy either!)

          "The best principles of our republic, secure to all it's citizens a perfect equality of rights" Thomas Jefferson

          by redstateliberal on Fri Nov 19, 2004 at 01:34:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  My First Week Here (none)
      Just after having found this place I tripped over someone who was exhorting others to troll rate someone simply due to disagreement, and I apparently made the newbie mistake of giving that nasty poster a "1".  Well, he followed me into a totally different thread, asking why I gave the "1" and then when I explained he troll-rated me both on the explanation and many others of my comments over the prior week.  It was such a sour experience for a newcomer.  But, I'm such a lover of debate and a devotee of the environment (and other issues) that I stayed, and suddenly, one day, MeteorBlades gave me a "4".  By then, of course, I had read enough here to really appreciate the source of that rating.  So, I just wanted to say "thanks" and also that the quality of debate DEPENDS upon intelligent and engaged disagreement.  Sometimes I give "4's" to posters on both sides of a debate just because I feel that I have been educated in the best Platonic style.  

      Fuzzy only works for pets.

      by NotFuzzy on Mon Nov 29, 2004 at 02:40:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site