[Suggestion] Remove "vote Post Up/down" Feature.

[Renan.Ruivo]

This is doing more harm than good. I'm seeing good, honest and veteran players get double digit negative votes, followed by rude and or dismissive comments by people who either just signed in, or are new in the game.

 

I don't know why this is happening. There is nothing wrong with what these people (me included) are saying. We kept our posting, suggesting and communicating within General Discussion and all other threads the same way we were doing during Closed Beta, and we were making progress. Now all we get is rude people who take things at face value, are quick to judge and/or offend, dismiss and just act in a childish manner (especially if the original poster has a founder badge and a high post count).

 

 

You don't need to believe me, just go to GD and check for yourselves. I'm pretty sure that there are people abusing the feature by creating several accounts and just voting down (or up) multiple times.

 

 

 

So i don't get why feedback by forum was working during CB, and isn't working better during OB. If anything, it's gotten a little bit worse.

[Westmin]

+1 (irony noted)! I received -9 votes for pointing out that game mechanics take time to master :(, and it was replying to the first post of new player who was bashing Warframe without reason. As these are entirely arbitrary, people just vote if they disagree.

[Renan.Ruivo]

+1 (irony noted)! I received -9 votes for pointing out that game mechanics take time to master :(, and it was replying to the first post of new player who was bashing Warframe without reason. As these are entirely arbitrary, people just vote if they disagree.

 

Exactly. As i said somewhere else, these ratings do not help. If the idea, suggestion or complaint is legit, the thread will pick up steam and a lot of people will post on it. If it's a bad thread, worst thing that can happen is half a dozen people posting while mocking the OP.

 

However with the "rating system" a legitimally good idea that received -9 from random people and no replies at all will definatly drain the willingness of our members to step up and speak their minds. 

 

 

Anonimoulsy rating someone else is easy, cheap and at best useless. If you don't agree with something that someone is saying, then make a quote post and adress that people directly.

[Westmin]

"I believe I have the right to face my accuser." The rating system doesn't help anyone, unless strong upvotes brings it up to the DE team sooner. There should be a mechanism to draw attention to great development ideas, but the downvote option doesn't serve that purpose.

[G3rman]

You are letting your opinions of these 'good, honest, veteran' player posts get in the way. How you feel about the poster and how you respect them is irrelevant in how they will be perceived by the general forum populace.

 

Just because you have played longer or have a badge under your name does not mean you deserve respect, because you can very easily be wrong or have an opinion not many people agree with. Downvotes illustrate that.

 

At the same time, I accept there are people who will abuse the feature, but this is commonplace on any forum with a rating system. In the end, the up and down votes are a way to express your opinion on a post without having to necessarily make a post.

 

Another PvP thread comes up and you don't feel like commenting. Downvote it. That should illustrate to the OP that there is obviously something wrong with what they posted.

 

You see a cool concept that you can really get behind, so you upvote it. If you don't have time to make a post and add to it, this is an important feature to show your support.

 

Now if you feel strongly about either situation in the scenario, then you can and will most likely post and expand on your interest or disinterest. But there is a purpose to ratings.

 

I think right now, people are simply taking the ratings too personally when they should be looking farther out at the entire point of why the rating happened. It was just the fact that someone disagreed, or in the rare case, they abused it and used it to try and harm you in some way.

 

By definition, downvoting is not the same as trolling. There is a constructive and destructive way to use the rating system, and you are only picking on the bad part.

[Kravensky]

I don't see the purpose of a Up/Down vote when it is anonymous. You like a comment? Post, and explain why. You don't? Well, reply and explain where you disagree. Otherwise. Please move on.

 

There should be a system where you need to add a "Reason" when you vote on a comment. I think a forum is useless if it isn't a place where opinions are voiced and debated. A + or a - doesn't tell me anything outside of "Someone was bored and gave every post in this topic a +1 or -1" Or something like: "Hey, why did you vote for Obama?" "Oh, uh... hmmm. Cuz..." Enlightening.

 

Or, yeah, remove it entirely.

Edited April 17, 2013 by Kravensky

[G3rman]

Forcing people to do something to use a feature isn't very becoming of a forum. Circumstances can prevent people from doing certain actions, but the rating system offers another outlet to display opinion on a subject.

[Renan.Ruivo]

Forcing people to do something to use a feature isn't very becoming of a forum. Circumstances can prevent people from doing certain actions, but the rating system offers another outlet to display opinion on a subject.

 

Yup. Ideally, they do. On EVE-Online forums, the only other game forum i participate in has it. The difference is that while a lot of EVE players are trolls, only a handfull of them are downright childish.

 

And about your previous post, i agree with most of it, don't have any opinions on some of it but do disagree in one point. I don't think i'm letting my opinion of how i perceive veterans (you included) get in the way. I believe in what i see, and what i see is people who were once treated respectfully across the boards getting treated like they don't even know what they are talking about, and in some cases getting "mobbed".

 

 

So this, believe you or not, is not me or anyone else demanding respect from the top of our "high horses" because "we are veterans". This is about people with prejudice that are already assuming that we ride in high-horses in the first place, and treating us accordingly without even knowing us.

[G3rman]

Forums should not force players to act in such a way outside of moderating inflammatory content. A person should not have to jump through additional hopes to make a post or put up an image. It goes against the purpose of the forum being an open place.

 

Your stance appears to be more of a personal issue you have with these 'new' forumites, and not something that can be fixed by removing the rating system. Perhaps you hope that if the rating system were to be eliminated, these 'trolls' would be forced to post to make their derogatory comments or feelings shown so that you can fight them. This is not good behavior for either party and should lead to moderation on both sides for escalating the conflict, rather than having it solve the problem.

 

You will encounter these kinds of people regardless of where you go, and regardless of how they choose to display their colored opinions of you and others. Whether it be via post or rating, if these people want to act in a disruptive or disrespectful fashion they will do so.

 

As I have said on other forums I have moderated; if they attack you or make insults 'report and ignore' the post and user. If it's just a negative rating, then apart from not being able to do much about it, it really has little impact on your post's message, nor should it be very harmful to you personally. it is just a number, after all. If the person decides to express their distaste for what you have said in a constructive, arguable manner then you should be able to continue the conversation from there, hopefully without getting into the moderation territory.

Edited April 17, 2013 by G3rman

[Renan.Ruivo]

Forums should not force players to act in such a way outside of moderating inflammatory content. A person should not have to jump through additional hopes to make a post or put up an image. It goes against the purpose of the forum being an open place.

 

Your stance appears to be more of a personal issue you have with these 'new' forumites, and not something that can be fixed by removing the rating system. Perhaps you hope that if the rating system were to be eliminated, these 'trolls' would be forced to post to make their derogatory comments or feelings shown so that you can fight them. This is not good behavior for either party and should lead to moderation on both sides for escalating the conflict, rather than having it solve the problem.

 

You will encounter these kinds of people regardless of where you go, and regardless of how they choose to display their colored opinions of you and others. Whether it be via post or rating, if these people want to act in a disruptive or disrespectful fashion they will do so.

 

As I have said on other forums I have moderated; if they attack you or make insults 'report and ignore' the post and user. If it's just a negative rating, then apart from not being able to do much about it, it really has little impact on your post's message, nor should it be very harmful to you personally. it is just a number, after all. If the person decides to express their distaste for what you have said in a constructive, arguable manner then you should be able to continue the conversation from there, hopefully without getting into the moderation territory.

 

I understand and respect your opinion. Honestly, i can't say it's invalid because it's not. That is the truth as i see it as well, that a "ratings system" should have no impact on how people take the message being given by the original poster (or any poster whatsoever).

 

But the problem is not wether i agree with you or not, we can only opiniate on what exactly the ratings system's impact have on the several people who are posting, regardless of content, because it is a matter of personal feeling. You obvioulsy don't care if you post something and end up with -39 for no reason whatsoever (Probably because you are German?! Zing!), but there are people who do. 

 

 

And posting on EVE-O forums for over 7 years made me have a pretty HTFU attitude about people who choose trying to stab be with words. But in all honesty, with each "-1" i feel less and less willing to offer any sort of feedback and participate in these forums at all (much to my surprise), because suddenly i cannot argue with whoever is disagreeing with me. Personally i have great fun at watching and interacting with people with little gray matter that try to act like A******s with me. So that's my personal case. I want to know why people who "-1" me did, in fact, "-1" me. Want to know which part of my usually gigantic posts they didn't agree with, and try to work with it. It's called constructive feedback. If they "-1" me just because, i'll have great fun in shooting them down on the spot.

 

But of course, since rating posts is done anonimously, i cannot know nor argue with whoever "disagrees" with me.

 

 

 

Other people will just take it personally, get offended and leave.. others will feel bellitled or humiliated.. and leave. And i think we'll end up with a pretty destructive community, which has the potential to harm the game.

 

 

Might be overreaction on my part because of the sudden "-XX's", and it's quite possible that this will die out and hopefully the atmosphere around GD will once again be one of constructive conversation and sharing. But i fear if that isn't the case.

[G3rman]

People can find themselves humiliated and belittled over a variety of things. Eliminating a system just because it has a chance to harm a small portion of the forum's population's feelings is not a good enough reason, in my opinion, to remove it.

 

The group you are against is a minority, a possibly vocal one, but a minority nonetheless. They exist on all forums and they inevitably expand as the forums gain members and popularity. It is something you have to deal with if you want to post on forums, because you are opening yourself up to an environment where there are people from all walks of life that can comment and rate.

 

If the rating system affects a person enough to want to stop posting, that is a personal problem they need to resolve about themselves rather than the forums needing to accommodate their sensitive emotions. On the flip side, the rating system could benefit from having a drop down list for moderator staff to read those who chose to up or down vote; if a person is spamming the downvote, then the moderator can see this and quickly warn and possibly ban the user.

 

The system has enough warranted benefits that I can't see the emotional argument being enough to overturn it. However, I agree that as the forum expands, the moderators need access to certain information and tools to better inspect the use of these features in order to properly moderate the forum and ensure the features are being used as intended.

[Insanityman]

I think the biggest fault with the ratings system is the fact we can't see why something went up or down.  As much as I hate the space absorbing one line responses, a "-1 for being a $&*^" is more helpful than a generic -1 (at least if the post had some meat to it).

 

I've seen many comments (most in GD) in the negatives, not because the post was "wrong" in facts, but "wrong" in tone or context.  There has been a mindbogglingly (can that be a word now, please?) high number of condescending posts lately, and I can understand people taking offence to it.  Maybe its the topics I open (im likely blind to my own patterns and habits in this regard), but there is a trend to what I notice getting -1'd to oblivion: PvP posts and people being rude (or at least coming across that way).

 

There have been many calls for nerfs, calls for changes and calls for "increased difficulty".  The trend im seeing here is the threads that want nerfs downvote the guys who go into the thread complaining about the game being to easy and saying they are flat out wrong without looking at how the topic creator wanted the "problem" addressed. Of course the same happens with the people saying "ancients too hard, nerf plox" getting downvoted in the "make things harder" threads. What did you expect walking into enemy territory like that? I see too much willful blindness on the part of the posters.

 

No one seems to want to see the other point of view. All they see is "oh, he called for a nerf, he needs to L2P", they make a one line post as such and get spit-roasted in the ratings for it.  Does anyone read a whole post anymore? Does anyone respond to a whole post or address one in its entirety?  Not often enough. Did the person who made the -XX post address more than one point the topic examined? Did they approach it in a respectful way, making damn sure not to come across as condescending? Not likely.  You are now in the court of open-beta opinion, compose yourself and behave as you should.

 

I've also see many threads derailed and the arguments the topic was trying to address get butchered by people "creatively rewording" the topic to fit a tiny niche to make attacking it easier. Asking to spread out the power of the infested faction by adding new units and removing their reliance on ancients as "the only thing truly terrifying about them" gets beaten like a dead horse and butchered into a "nerf ancients" thread.  Yes it involves making ancients fewer, or weaker, but where did the topic say that the infested weren't going to get that power back somewhere else? When the topic creator says lets brainstorm some new units just to see if this becomes viable and gets "no, ancients are ok, l2p" and "stop messing with what works, were trying to IMPROVE the game here, guys" for answers, something is wrong.

 

Appologies for the semi-rant above, but bringing these issues to light might help get them adressed, along with the +/- system abuse as I believe they go hand in hand.

 

I guess what I'm getting at Renan.Ruivo is you are preaching to the choir, and a whole hell of a lot of seagulls (think NEMO).  Used properly the +/- system could do fantastic things (mostly for keeping threads cleaner) but its lacking in functions that could multiply its effectiveness and reduce trolling.  Information is key, and the present system doesn't give people what they need to interpret it in the propper light.  Part of it is misuse of the system (trolls), and part of it is a community not willing to work out a standard for its use.  When you can -1 a post for bad content, an impolite response or simply disagreeing with someone and not be asked to say why, you leave too many holes for the system to hold its water.  Functional discourse and discussion can only be had when the opposing viewpoint makes itself known.  How do you address a bug when you can't recreate it?

 

To fix this, I think the more info (on topic) we have the better. I want to know WHY a post got the vote it did, and I want to know HOW MANY of each (+ and -) it got.  We need a way to keep the topic on topic.  Either have the -'s auto minimize posts tagged with too many "-1 for off topic" tags, or have moderators remove extraneous posts.  If someone wants to +1 a post, make them write something about what they support, or at least have them highlight a portion of the post they agree with and have that get a superscript # associated with which upvote they were (think of the reference superscripts that wikipedia has, if you hit the link it takes you to the book/publication where the info was pulled from. In this case, the superscript hyperlink changes the color of the text that was highlighted in association with the +1 vote).  Same goes for the negatives; a ten item post might have only one thing wrong but if no one tells you which point they don't like, you're screwed.

 

Renan.Ruivo and G3rman (or anyone else :D ), do you think any of the suggestions in the last paragraph will work? Do they need any work/changes? Are there any other benefits I missed that should be easy to obtain? I really want the forums to be the best tool they can be for productive discussion, but as it stands they need work. We need ideas.

[Renan.Ruivo]

snip

 

I'll probably need to re-read your post, since it's late and i'm medicated. But since you took the time to write it, i feel you deserve an answer as early as i can possibly give. (Note that i might edit it out later to add stuff, in which case i'll notify further on the thread).

 

 

 

Well, you seem to understand most of my problem with the current way the rating system works. For starters, it's a simple equation of X-Y=Z and in my opinion that's wrong. It should show both UP votes and DOWN votes. A -9 post will give the wrong impression that the community unanimoulsy disagreed with "the post" (more about why the quotes later on).

 

But if it had +5 votes?! That means that it had -14 votes. So five people agreed and fourteen disagreed. That's not unanimity.

 

So lets call it issue #1.

 

 

Now, another problem i have with it. This is a discussion forum, and the current rating system provides anonymity. By the very nature of a forum (be it internet BB or an actual forum) is for people to debate. Look at the discussion that me and G3rman were/are having. This is the way forums are supposed to work. On the other hand, if No Name Joe disagrees with me, the discussion cannot evolve because i don't know who he is and i don't know why he didn't liked it. He should say why he didn't liked it, and we should discuss to try and achieve common ground.

 

Let's call this one issue #2

 

 

Complementing on the above (so let's call it issue #2.1), the same case of anonymity can lead to abuse. People who are biased against one person or another and will vote down (or up) based on his own opinion about the poster. If someone doesn't like me and comes across one of my posts, he won't even read it. He'll -1 it just because. The same happens with pretty much every DEV. If DE_Steve made a thread talking about his pink shorts, he would get +XXX (no pun intended) votes. If an average member did the same, you bet he would get (in my opinion, justifiably so), plenty of -1 votes.

 

 

Now, i'm not sure you can call the next argument an issue i have with it, but more of an opinion. In my opinion, it is unecessary. Like i said on the second paragraph about "the post", i put it in quotes because the actual post might be a simple suggestion, or an entire wall of text of suggestions, feedbacks and opinions. It might be a 750 wall of text.

 

In that case, the current voting system is inapropriate, because it does not matter if someone gives +1 or -1, we won't know what the voter is agreeing with. 

 

However, if someone did - as they always did before this system was invented - quote a part of the post and writes "-1" or "+1" on it this would at best offer the "voter" the option to voice his opinion on why he agreed or disagreed. At worse, it would be just a "+1" or "-1" post with a name stamped on it, so people will know that this person didn't had much to say in the first place, so his own opinion does not, apparently, hold much weight.

 

That would be issue #3

 

 

Those are the issues i can think of. I have more issues, but those aren't worth mentioning because they are biased.

 

 

 

Now, to try and answer your question. Yes, we need a way to keep the topic on topic. However everything between "Either have the -'s[...] and [...]Same goes for negatives" got lost on me because i don't have much idea of what you're trying to propose so i won't pretend that i have (i'm a maitenance IT guy, not a coding IT guy =) ). So that means i agree with what you said after "Same goes for the negatives", and i detailed the issue above, which explains one of the reasons why the current system is flawled.

 

 

You said we need ideas, and i agree. I'll give my own spin on what we need and say that we need active interaction. An anonymous rating system is a one-way form of passive interaction. Because the voter gets to "interact" with the poster, but is safe from any sort of critique himself.

Edited April 19, 2013 by Renan.Ruivo

[DSMK2]

I think it'll be better to just remove the down-vote option. That way threads that are liked enough (suggestions, ideas, and important feedback) are more visible to DE. If the person doesn't like a viewpoint he/she can state her reasons via a post or just ignore the thread.

[Renan.Ruivo]

I think it'll be better to just remove the down-vote option. That way threads that are liked enough (suggestions, ideas, and important feedback) are more visible to DE. If the person doesn't like a viewpoint he/she can state her reasons via a post or just ignore the thread.

 

I was first going to suggest this, but it sounds wrong IMO. This is what the likes (no pun intended) of Facebook do to create a false feeling of agreement and good will between everyone.

 

 

 

Although in hindsight that doesn't sound bad, does it?! And by the way, EVE-Online forums does it like that as well.. there is no dislike option, only Like. Come to think of, this is the second forum i've seen with both a like and a dislike button, and the other one quickly introduced a drop-down menu with the list of who voted up or down after everyone began -X everyone just because..

[DSMK2]

Having a like button is great for when a guy posts something that I have nothing else to contribute but I strongly support his idea; it's also better by itself in a 'good only' sort of way. With the dislike button however, it's a great way to invite trolls and negativity from both the guy receiving it and the guys down voting it.

 

For the most part I consider likes in forums much different than Facebook, where likes come at the spur of the moment "I like this person's post because he or she was witty and amused me at that one moment"; they tend to have more weight. I say this even though I do see those Facebook like likes happening here :P

[Quetzhal]

I think the upvotes are fine. They're a good way of agreeing to an idea if you don't have anything to add, or just a way to thank a player for making an amusing post, or writing a good story, that kind of thing. Downvotes, however, should be removed - if you disagree with something, it should be explained, not just given in the form of an arbitrary -1. Also, it's very open to abuse.

[Renan.Ruivo]

I think the upvotes are fine. They're a good way of agreeing to an idea if you don't have anything to add, or just a way to thank a player for making an amusing post, or writing a good story, that kind of thing. Downvotes, however, should be removed - if you disagree with something, it should be explained, not just given in the form of an arbitrary -1. Also, it's very open to abuse.

 

I wouldn't have a problem with that to be honest.

[krisp]

You are letting your opinions of these 'good, honest, veteran' player posts get in the way. How you feel about the poster and how you respect them is irrelevant in how they will be perceived by the general forum populace.

I also think that. And I've seen this guy defend someone's stupid statements just because they've been here since closed beta.

 

Hey OP. I know this might come as a new thing to you, but people are allowed to have different opinions than yours. And it's not like anything happens if a post is downvoted.

Edited April 19, 2013 by krisp

[MilesCadre]

Rep system really isnt doing much. Even when some forums removed the neg rep, it jsut was for eye candy. If someone as -9001 reputation, people will still listen if they have a good piece of info.

 

Furthermore, it just opens up trolling and flaming by -1ing a plethora of completely unrelated posts because said troller doesnt agree with the poster.

 

That being said, it seems WF's forumns dont even properly track a total of reputation, but rather just give you a list of topics that have been +/- repped in your profile.

 

In short, Its not necissary and personally I couldnt care less either way it goes. Whether or not the post has + or - rep, if it has good information it will be taken into consideration.

[Evan_]

In short, Its not necissary and personally I couldnt care less either way it goes. Whether or not the post has + or - rep, if it has good information it will be taken into consideration.

 

This. By the way, before that thread, I didn't even notice that function. Now that I'm aware, I rated the above post up. Guess I'll forget about it again in half an hour.

[Insanityman]

Rep system really isnt doing much. Even when some forums removed the neg rep, it jsut was for eye candy. If someone as -9001 reputation, people will still listen if they have a good piece of info.

 

 

I think thats what everyone's been getting to in one way or another, the rep system doesn't DO anything, and it encourages doing even less.

 

As much as I think a few more sweeping changes are in order, a good short term fix would be the removal of the -1 button.  It's safe, and doesn't open up the can of worms of actually making the rep system do something but leave the trolls unchecked.  It would be nice to give the rep system some power (hide negative posts, send a message to people about how/what they've written) but only if some method to prevent its abuse is added to go with it.

 

It would also be nice to know what effect the Dev Team was looking for when the rep system was implemented.  Were they looking for some kind of self policing forum or simply looking to guage something popularity among readers?

Edited April 19, 2013 by Insanityman

[Karosu]

This is how i read a thread, Read The OP, read the first few pages of quick responses, then i start glossing over the pages unless i see one with a bunch of +/-, then I'll read it. Other than that, for me the +/- doesnt have any effect on me.

 

The only times i'll use it when someone is being blantantly insulting in a non-productive manner ( - ), when someone says basically what i was going to say (+), the thread is really long and whatever i post will never be addressed or read (+/-), or if it is like the 3rd or 4th thread on the same topic and i don't want to bother retyping out a response (+/-).

[Renan.Ruivo]

This is how i read a thread, Read The OP, read the first few pages of quick responses, then i start glossing over the pages unless i see one with a bunch of +/-, then I'll read it. Other than that, for me the +/- doesnt have any effect on me.

 

The only times i'll use it when someone is being blantantly insulting in a non-productive manner ( - ), when someone says basically what i was going to say (+), the thread is really long and whatever i post will never be addressed or read (+/-), or if it is like the 3rd or 4th thread on the same topic and i don't want to bother retyping out a response (+/-).

 

I do it like that on EVE-O forums, where they don't have a -1, or "Dislike" feature. Only "like". I do like you do, and only stop to read the posts that have been liked somewhat, or a lot. Posts that haven't been liked are just that.. posts that nobody cared about. In that manner, it is actual helpfull in long threads since you can clearly see the posts the bring content to the discussion taking place.

[Renan.Ruivo]

I also think that. And I've seen this guy defend someone's stupid statements just because they've been here since closed beta.

 

Hey OP. I know this might come as a new thing to you, but people are allowed to have different opinions than yours. And it's not like anything happens if a post is downvoted.

 

I'd like to know where you've seen that. You're accusing me of something, and i have the right to see the proof.

 

No need to use sarcasm or irony. People are allowed to have different opinion than mine, of course. Nobody is asking to remove this right from them. You have a different opinion than mine? Say it. If i write a long post giving several opinions and you simply (and anonymously) downvote it, then i won't know what exactly you didn't agreed with, will I?!

 

 

Plus, if according to your opinion (that me and several other people on this thread share with you) downvotes don't do anything, then they aren't needed.