GTPlanet Suggestion. An improved method of the "Like"

[GBO Possum]

I realize this is possibly a little off-topic, however the responses to Suggestions make me think there has to be a better way than just counting "likes". For these threads or for any postings.

To take a leaf out of Amazon's book, I suggest providing two ways of voting for a post.

"This posting adds to the discussion" (or similar wording)​

OR

"This posting doesn't add to the discussion".​

Amazon hides posts which receive a lot of negative feedback and replaces them with a one liner which reads something like "this has received too many negative reviews to show it, but if you really want to read it click here".

So negatively rated postings are still readable, but can easily be ignored.

The "Like" score should be a composite of the feedback. +1 points for positive feedback, - 1 points for the other. So when sorted by the "Like" score, those whose unlikes exceed the likes will rank lower.

In my opinion, such a scheme will, over time, improve the quality of postings by providing more information to people posting, rewarding high quality with positive scoring, and encouraging low value posters who attract negative ratings to lift their game. If the like count is restored to the user profile, it will be easy to identify members who habitually attract negative feedback and vice versa.

It also provides a way that we, as members, can provide negative feedback without resorting to name calling and triggering flame wars.

Finally, it provides a scoring method which can be used by @Jordan and his moderators to identify cases where some poster counseling and guidance is required.

 

[SkylineObsession]

Well, it may be one way to get rid of some of the childish arguing from view.

 

[Northstar]

Well, it may be one way to get rid of some of the childish arguing from view.

Or it could also magnify it as people would just vote down a post that doesn't align with their thoughts or if they just don't like the person.

I say leave it as it with the number of likes that a person has not being visible without searching the overall list. Downvoting works on review sites/sections(even than it works poorly), it's a bad idea for a civilized forum.

 

[SkylineObsession]

Thats another good point.

There are seemingly more people on GTP these days with negative opinions/constant complaints, so the only posts left visible with be ones with complaining/mocking/negative points of view.

Poor GTP.

 

[Exorcet]

Amazon hides posts which receive a lot of negative feedback and replaces them with a one liner which reads something like "this has received too many negative reviews to show it, but if you really want to read it click here".

This is one of the must infuriating things in the entirety of the internet.

Also, via AUP all posts most contribute to the discussions, so technically this is pointless.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Amazon hides posts which receive a lot of negative feedback and replaces them with a one liner which reads something like "this has received too many negative reviews to show it, but if you really want to read it click here".

Amazon has a good reason to do that though (well, a logical one, if nothing else); negative feedback on products lessens the chances of it selling, so it makes sense they'd want to hide the stuff that doesn't fall in line. This is a discussion forum; there are no (or at least, shouldn't be any) wrong viewpoints. The idea that some folks opinions could be rendered invisible simply because others don't like it is a terrifying proposition for a site that relies on communication, IMO.

 

[GBO Possum]

Amazon has a good reason to do that though (well, a logical one, if nothing else); negative feedback on products lessens the chances of it selling, so it makes sense they'd want to hide the stuff that doesn't fall in line. This is a discussion forum; there are no (or at least, shouldn't be any) wrong viewpoints. The idea that some folks opinions could be rendered invisible simply because others don't like it is a terrifying proposition for a site that relies on communication, IMO.

Let me correct a number of inaccurate perceptions, @SlipZtrEm.

Amazon is not hiding negative feedback on products. What they are (sort of) hiding is feedback (or feedback on feedback) which just doesn't add to a helpful understanding. They don't hide it, they just collapse it into a single line.

In fact Amazon is very good at highlighting negative feedback on products, but only such negative feedback which is voted as helpful. They specifically present the feedback sorted by "most helpful", whether it is positive or negative toward the product. They also present most helpful positive and negative reviews side by side. For many products, the most positive helpful feedback may be still rather horrifically negative.

The reason for this comes down from Jeff Bezos whose driving principle is to create "the most customer-centric company on earth". You don't do that by hiding negative product reviews. But a part of achieving this goal is to make it easier for customers to avoid wading through a whole lot of trash talk, and getting to useful customer communication.

What inspired me to make this suggestion is what seems to me to be a growing number of comments like "PD could never get this right", or "Kaz doesn't know what he's doing". Baseless, content-free griping adds nothing.

It's these valueless posts which I'd like to see voted as unhelpful, and collapsed into a single line.

And I did not propose making opinions "invisible". So please don't be terrified. What terrifies me is that a moderator could read "invisible" in my suggestion.

My goal in this suggestion is to improve community communication, not reduce it. By reducing the amount of trash to wade through, and potentially discouraging fatuous posts, I believe the quality of actual communication will rise.

I also firmly believe that this community should have the capability to determine and improve the usefulness of GTPlanet. I would hate to see GTPlanet descend into the depths of the official forum of its major competitor.

Finally, I repeat that I want to provide extra tools for moderators to identify inappropriate postings, and habitually unhelpful members.

 

[BobK]

Actually, after an early foray into the GT5 section, I've avoided it and the GT6 section entirely. An idea like this might, just might, get the signal-to-noise ratio back up to where they might be worth visiting again. Or at least help out on it.

 

[SkylineObsession]

Rubbish complaining/arguing posts is what usually puts me off coming here, so something needs to be done. Harsher penalties or something maybe.

People are taking things public that should be in PM's so the rest of us can carry on discussing the topic.

 

[Exorcet]

What inspired me to make this suggestion is what seems to me to be a growing number of comments like "PD could never get this right", or "Kaz doesn't know what he's doing". Baseless, content-free griping adds nothing.

As Slip said, the function's use may not be limited to such comments. I personally don't care what other people think, I'll read through the thread and decide for myself what's worth reading or not. This doesn't mean there can't be a system like the one you proposed, I'd just need to be able to disable it for myself.

And I did not propose making opinions "invisible". So please don't be terrified. What terrifies me is that a moderator could read "invisible" in my suggestion.

It's not necessarily inaccurate.

My goal in this suggestion is to improve community communication, not reduce it. By reducing the amount of trash to wade through, and potentially discouraging fatuous posts, I believe the quality of actual communication will rise.

It could potentially reduce replies to "trash posts", leaving the creator of the post without feedback to use to improve. If you want to tell people what's wrong with their post, you can read the post and reply. You're going to have to read the post anyway to down vote it.

I also firmly believe that this community should have the capability to determine and improve the usefulness of GTPlanet. I would hate to see GTPlanet descend into the depths of the official forum of its major competitor.

There doesn't seem to be any chance of this happening on the current forum in my opinion.

Finally, I repeat that I want to provide extra tools for moderators to identify inappropriate postings, and habitually unhelpful members.

The report button has this covered and is less abusable.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Let me correct a number of inaccurate perceptions, @SlipZtrEm.

Amazon is not hiding negative feedback on products. What they are (sort of) hiding is feedback (or feedback on feedback) which just doesn't add to a helpful understanding. They don't hide it, they just collapse it into a single line.

In fact Amazon is very good at highlighting negative feedback on products, but only such negative feedback which is voted as helpful. They specifically present the feedback sorted by "most helpful", whether it is positive or negative toward the product. They also present most helpful positive and negative reviews side by side. For many products, the most positive helpful feedback may be still rather horrifically negative.

The reason for this comes down from Jeff Bezos whose driving principle is to create "the most customer-centric company on earth". You don't do that by hiding negative product reviews. But a part of achieving this goal is to make it easier for customers to avoid wading through a whole lot of trash talk, and getting to useful customer communication.

My bad; I recognize that's the case there. The distinction that I think is important though, is that those are customers, so while I agree it's important to get straight to the point in the world of Amazon (both with positive and negative reviews), discussions here aren't quite that simple - and that's to say nothing of the various other parts of GTP that aren't relating to GT itself

What inspired me to make this suggestion is what seems to me to be a growing number of comments like "PD could never get this right", or "Kaz doesn't know what he's doing". Baseless, content-free griping adds nothing.

It's these valueless posts which I'd like to see voted as unhelpful, and collapsed into a single line.

Also true; though that'd be a user's opinion, and they're free to voice them so long as they're kept (reasonably) on topic and within the AUP. I suppose it also depends on if the post consists of, say, nothing but one of those example lines, or is an entire multi-paragraph post with one as a single line...

And I did not propose making opinions "invisible". So please don't be terrified. What terrifies me is that a moderator could read "invisible" in my suggestion.

It's essentially doing to "negative" posts what the ignore function currently does for individual users; so no, not quite rendering them invisible, but almost.

I should also point out that I'm simply providing my view as a user of the forum, not as a moderator, in this case

My goal in this suggestion is to improve community communication, not reduce it. By reducing the amount of trash to wade through, and potentially discouraging fatuous posts, I believe the quality of actual communication will rise.

I believe having posts effectively silenced by group-think discourages communication; one could reasonably argue it would affect how users post, ensuring they post what might be considered "safe" for fear of down-voting. Again, I should stress that I understand the use in the context of Amazon, but see it as detrimental to a site where the entire point is discussion.

I also firmly believe that this community should have the capability to determine and improve the usefulness of GTPlanet. I would hate to see GTPlanet descend into the depths of the official forum of its major competitor.

Heh, no need to look at competitor's pages; the official PS forums are example enough, really.

Finally, I repeat that I want to provide extra tools for moderators to identify inappropriate postings, and habitually unhelpful members.

The report function already exists, and works appropriately; if a post is against site rules, a user can report it, and a member of staff can deal with it. The suggested approach would mean posts could essentially disappear simply because people don't like either the member or the opinions they are presenting. And yes, we already do get reports simply because user A doesn't like user B

 

[GBO Possum]

The report function exists, and that's fine. With my proposal, I don't see that if user A dislikes user B, that user B is going to be able to be negatively affected, since user A only has one vote. And if user A manages to round up a gang and have them issue mass "unhelpfuls", that would be easily detected by the system.

Anyway, the posting has been moved off into a backwater, so the discussion will probably now die.

 

[TB]

The report function exists, and that's fine. With my proposal, I don't see that if user A dislikes user B, that user B is going to be able to be negatively affected, since user A only has one vote. And if user A manages to round up a gang and have them issue mass "unhelpfuls", that would be easily detected by the system.

That's all assuming that the forum software supports a system like that, which I'm 98% sure it doesn't.

 

[GBO Possum]

Yes, my suggestion requires software changes. If that invalidates my suggestion, please remove the thread. I'm sorry to have wasted your time.

 

[Jordan]

Although I can appreciate the benefits of the idea, it would require serious re-working of the software in a way that I'm not prepared to tackle.

Also, while this type of post-rating / hiding system can work well in many types of online discussion environments (Reddit, YouTube comments, blog comments, etc.), it can disrupt the thread or flow of conversation in a forum topic, and does have some negative social consequences.

 

[GBO Possum]

@Jordan, thank you for your feedback. The functionality of GTPlanet.net is excellent, and since you say the rework required is beyond what you'd like to tackle, then I'm good with that response. I think this site does some amazing stuff and is leaps and bounds better than any other forum I can think of. So thank you!

 

[20B_4ME]

Or simply add a "Dislike" button next to the "Like" one. Alternatively, use simple thumbs up and down.

 

[Grayfox]

Problem with a dislike or thumbs down is it can be abused
If you disagree with someone you can thumbdown/dislike the post.

Even the like button can be abused.

A good system is when you have to explain why you want to give the user a like or dislike for the post.

 

[BobK]

Problem with a dislike or thumbs down is it can be abused
If you disagree with someone you can thumbdown/dislike the post.

Even the like button can be abused.

A good system is when you have to explain why you want to give the user a like or dislike for the post.

I'm afraid that if you had to explain why you liked (or disliked) a post, you'd mostly get responses like "I like" or "👍" or "sux".

 

[TB]

A good system is when you have to explain why you want to give the user a like or dislike for the post.

The way it's set up now works. I enjoy getting reports that members like my post(s) but taking the total likes out of public view removes the competition aspect of it.

Dislikes, thumbs down, etc. wouldn't lead anywhere good. Besides, we already have the ultimate dislike button, it's just labeled Report.*

* Don't abuse or misuse it.

 

[GBO Possum]

The report button is a sledgehammer. I wont use that just to disagree with a suggestion. Would you?

 

[TB]

The report button is a sledgehammer. I wont use that just to disagree with a suggestion. Would you?

I meant more for if it violated the AUP, hence the don't abuse it bit.

 

[GBO Possum]

I meant more for if it violated the AUP, hence the don't abuse it bit.

So, do you agree that the "Report" button is unsuitable to the purpose discussed in this suggestion?

Edit: Added "you" in sentence above

 

[Coxis]

I'd support a negative voting feature to hide immature / trollish posts.

Even if it can be abused, not everyone will be abusing it, and it would take several negative votes to hide a comment. Maybe add a cooldown feature or impose a limit of negative votes per day.