(October 30, 2012 at 6:29 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: I was on a forum one time that had a rate up/rate down system and you could set up your profile to only view posts with a positive rating, or only above -5 or something like that. It was great because the dumb or obnoxious got voted out of existence effectively. I eventually switched my profile to view all because I like knowing the worst things people post.

Slashdot works much like this - although you only get a limited number of "mod points" to rate posts, and only posters with some level of positive karma get them, and a post can only be modded as high as +5 or as low as -1.

While a very large number of posts that get downrated are crap, there's a lot that gets downrated based on popularity. FWIW, I read Slashdot without filtering based on rating.

I think that's one of the more successful systems of allowing positive/negative comment ratings, though I do not thing it would work here based solely on the numbers.

This thread is reminding me why it is often better to not be Mr. Helper and instead keep one's suggestions to oneself.

When I first splashed down on rationalia.com, I voiced some strong adverse opinions regarding the complacency of things like assuming the accused were guilty [in the Catholic pedophile scandals] and the like. I received tremendous abuse, censure and accusations of being an apologist for Catholic rape of children.

If a negative rep system had been in place, you would likely not be reading my words here now. Rationalia, despite her faults, has no rep system, plus or minus. Reputation systems, it seems to me, take the place of more intimate human intercourse. Instead of saying what you liked, why, and how it touched you, you just click a button. Not saying this in itself is bad, I like both forums, and both deliver different experiences. But if substantive criticism becomes easily displaced by a dislike button, I think something valuable will be lost. (As it is, I'm ambivalent about likes and rep points, not only because it is unfair to older posters, but because it encourages superficial interaction, where superficiality is a danger.)

(October 30, 2012 at 7:39 pm)IATIA Wrote: If one wanted a sullen peaceful board, where all are in agreement, then bite the bullet, believe in god and hit some xtian boards. Nice and peaceful ... until some damn atheist shows up.

I think you have grossly misunderestimated just how well different denominations actually get along with eacher other.

"Misunderestimated"? So he didn't underestimate it correctly? What?

(October 30, 2012 at 7:49 pm)Tino Wrote: This thread is reminding me why it is often better to not be Mr. Helper and instead keep one's suggestions to oneself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj5k6toS7i8

Really Tino??

Stop being an infantile,whinny,childishly naive individual. You have made a suggestion and it is up to the admin and mods of this site to consider it.

How OLD are you??

(October 31, 2012 at 11:20 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote:

(October 30, 2012 at 7:49 pm)Tino Wrote: This thread is reminding me why it is often better to not be Mr. Helper and instead keep one's suggestions to oneself.

Really Tino??

Stop being an infantile,whinny,childishly naive individual. You have made a suggestion and it is up to the admin and mods of this site to consider it.

How OLD are you??

Apparently you took offense to my question in another thread, when none was intended. I am 52 to answer your question. I still don't have an answer to mine but don't bother. I believe we have some teenagers in this forum and I was trying to understand where you might be coming from in asking your question about endorsements, and I had no idea what age you might be, or what your experience with voting or politics might be. Rather than ask your age I asked if you are an adult. Again, no offense was intended. And while I can be at times naive I am not infantile, whiney or childish.

(October 31, 2012 at 11:50 am)Tino Wrote:

(October 31, 2012 at 11:20 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Really Tino??

Stop being an infantile,whinny,childishly naive individual. You have made a suggestion and it is up to the admin and mods of this site to consider it.

How OLD are you??

Apparently you took offense to my question in another thread, when none was intended. I am 52 to answer your question. I still don't have an answer to mine but don't bother. I believe we have some teenagers in this forum and I was trying to understand where you might be coming from in asking your question about endorsements, and I had no idea what age you might be, or what your experience with voting or politics might be. Rather than ask your age I asked if you are an adult. Again, no offense was intended. And while I can be at times naive I am not infantile, whiney or childish.

Silly child! I did not take offense. Gave that up as bad for my health!

We do not do "endorsements" here in OZ ...being a Penal colony we have a very healthy disregard for such things. Which is why I questioned such a posit. I AM naive as to the workings of American politics and fail to understand WHY such "endorsements" would carry any weight at all. Are you trying to tell me that Americans are so stupid as to follow said "endorsements"?

Yes you are whiney. My dear Tino you are whining about the "endorsements" issue ...YOUR VOTE Counts!! Why are you whining about it? Go and VOTE!! Only an infant would whinge about the odds stacked against his preferred outcome.... VOTE!


We do NOT have the greatest government here in OZ and we are waiting to VOTE the bastards OUT!

Tell me ...would you rather have a president who will sell OUT the American people to Asia? Or would you rather a president who will engage the Asian market as an equal? For us here our government is about 50 years behind the times and very good at rhetoric but fucking hopeless at actually DOING ANYTHING! (I remember in 1986 a friend of mine striving to learn Mandarin because his company was starting up in China and said that China was the 'Next big Market') Don't get me started on our Budget and our "Bruce Springsteen" channeling Treasurer!! There is a fine example of pedanticism as opposed to pragmatism.

I am in my 56th year on this rock, so no I am no tweenager, although I often look in the mirror and wonder who the fuck is looking back at me. This end of history sucks BIG TIME!!

(October 31, 2012 at 12:08 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Silly child! I did not take offense. Gave that up as bad for my health!

Your constant name calling and condescension suggest otherwise.

(October 31, 2012 at 12:08 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote: We do not do "endorsements" here in OZ ...being a Penal colony we have a very healthy disregard for such things. Which is why I questioned such a posit.

That's a lovely story, and you tell it with such enthusiasm, but you're just factually wrong about endorsements in Australia. Here are the Australian newspaper endorsements from your 2010 federal elections:

The Advertiser - Labor
The Age - Labor
The Australian - Liberal
The Australian Financial Review - Liberal
The Canberra Times - Labor
The Courier-Mail - Liberal National
The Daily Telegraph - Liberal
The Herald Sun - Liberal
The Mercury - Labor
Northern Territory News - Labor
The Sydney Morning Herald - Labor
The West Australian - Liberal

(October 31, 2012 at 12:08 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote: I AM naive as to the workings of American politics and fail to understand WHY such "endorsements" would carry any weight at all. Are you trying to tell me that Americans are so stupid as to follow said "endorsements"?

Second time now - the value of the endorsement is the argument behind it.

(October 31, 2012 at 12:08 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote: Yes you are whiney. My dear Tino you are whining about the "endorsements" issue ...YOUR VOTE Counts!! Why are you whining about it? Go and VOTE!! Only an infant would whinge about the odds stacked against his preferred outcome.... VOTE!

I see no odds stacked against my preferred outcome and don't worry, I'll be voting. Suggest you do the same.

(October 31, 2012 at 12:08 pm)KichigaiNeko Wrote: For us here our government is about 50 years behind the times and very good at rhetoric but fucking hopeless at actually DOING ANYTHING!

Unfortunately for you, at least one thing they got done was implementing a carbon tax which has increased your electricity cost between 10% and 20% depending on where you live in Australia, while accomplishing nothing for CO2 reduction.

(October 31, 2012 at 11:09 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: "Misunderestimated"? So he didn't underestimate it correctly? What?

Lol, no. There should be no 'mis' in front of that. I often post on here while trying to do something else at the same. Obviously, I'm not very good at multi-tasking.