A comments rating system, ala Slashdot

[Jon'sLightBulbs]

Is there a way in V bulletin to implement a post rating system, similar to the karma feature at slashdot?

Many of the posts here are appalingly bereft of insight. It's a bit tiresome scrolling through scores of answers containing only smiley faces, one sentence answers without explanations, and the like.

A rating system for posts would give forum members incentive to post more thoughtful content. For instance, at Slashdot, members meeting certain criteria are provided the power to rate each comment from 1-5. Additionally, they can post such descriptors as "insightful" or "funny." The resulting rating is posted next to the original poster's comment. Slashdot users can set their viewer to display messages that meet or exceed a certain threshold rating, and only display the headings of posts that fall below.

As a result, Slashdot posters are faced with the option of either posting only thoughtful commentary, or seeing their post only as a header among a sea of other headers, instead of as a full post.

A ratings system would benefit macrumors immensely. Even if there is no way to implement a karma system in V bulletin similar to Slashdot's, a future upgrade might take ratings into consideration.

 

[Lacero]

Excellent suggestion!

 

[Sun Baked]

Problem with these is there are some people that tend to be vindictive (or buddies) that rate posters at 1 no matter how coherent their thoughts, and some people at 5 -- even though the poster usually makes it seem like they don't have the mental capacity to tie their shoelaces.

There is the thread rating, but nobody much uses it, and I don't think it shows anything under a 4 star rating anyway.

 

[Lacero]

Mod points are given randomly. Plus, you can't moderate a thread that you post in. Plus, they have what is called meta-moderation, which basically means you can get to moderate how moderators moderate posts. So if a user abuses his mod points, meta moderation assures that user gets fewer chances to moderate. The Slashdot model is very successul.

 

[Sun Baked]

Mod points are given randomly. Plus, you can't moderate a thread that you post in. Plus, they have what is called meta-moderation, which basically means you can get to moderate how moderators moderate posts. So if a user abuses his mod points, meta moderation assures that user gets fewer chances to moderate. The Slashdot model is very successul.

But alas this isn't slashdot, and you have to work within V-Bulletin, and I think it's thread ranking and reputation.

Both of which are abused.

Unless you want to write something.

 

[jim.]

Slashdot moderation is only as successful as the moderators are informed. In other words you get a lot of crap that is modded informative that turns out to be ... well ... crap. Plus very few moderators tend to delve into the comments to find the correct information. Not saying that MR readers will be that lazy, but moderation isn't really needed here yet, and when it is then we will be in a similar situation.

If you can't tell, I don't really like the Slashdot system, and I hope that MR doesn't turn into the mess that is Slashdot.

Jim

 

[arn]

Yeah... vbulletin really shows it's limitations once you start having 100+ comments on an article.

Unfortunately, as pointed out by others.... vbulletin doesn't allow a Slashdot-like rating system. I do think such a system would be beneficial... but unfortunately, would require a custom solution, unless vbulletin includes it in a future release.

arn

 

[Lacero]

Many of the posts here are appalingly bereft of insight. It's a bit tiresome scrolling through scores of answers containing only smiley faces, one sentence answers without explanations, and the like.

You should visit Spymac.com.

 

[alex_ant]

Looking to Slashdot for examples?? Noooooo!!

One of the strengths of Macrumors is that, while it is a pro-Mac site, you are allowed to criticize and poke at the Mac status quo. A ratings system invites people to set their threshold above dissent and filter out what they don't want to hear. The Slashdot rating system inspires groupthink, self-awareness, pseudo-intellectualism, and sycophantry -- rah rah rah Linux and opensores, boo software patents, etc. The problem is that it's impossible to get people to separate post quality from post content in their ratings - everyone is biased and the bias filters through to the moderation, and because this site is so overwhelmingly pro-Apple, what would happen here is all posts praising Apple would get moderated up, and all posts critical would get modded down.

We need the criticism to keep us grounded, otherwise we become like the Slashdot crowd where, because we set our threshold at +2 and never hear any criticism of Linux or opensores, we think that it is only a matter of time before these respective things grow to completely dominate computing due to their inherent superiority etc. We need criticism, otherwise we start to believe things like, "Apple's Photoshop benchmarks really ARE an accurate measure of Macs' speed vs. PCs," or, "Macs really ARE virtually perfect and trouble-free..."

Macrumors is nice because it's simple and relatively democratic, and the posters are relatively well-balanced. Slashdot is not the place I would look to to model a community on...

 

[Blue Velvet]

It's a bit tiresome scrolling through scores of answers containing only smiley faces, one sentence answers without explanations, and the like.

An increase to the minimum character count in a post might accomplish the same thing -- mind you, people could then fill it up with smilies or other fillers, I guess.

In the longer run, leading by example, blocking annoying posters and not responding to posts that vex you may be the best bet.

On the whole, these forums and its posters are far more articulate than many forums I have ventured into.

 

[DavidLeblond]

Noooo Slashdot mod rating system = very bad! It was a good idea when they thought of it, but the implementation is awful. People who generally post comments that fit the slashdot status quo are modded up, and people who disagree are modded down without any regard to which comment is actually true. Then after awhile if someone posts something actually intelligent, it is buried amongst trolls beneath the few people who posted first and got modded up.

Plus you get people throwing in their opinions and swearing that they're facts just to get mod points. It gets ugly. And further, you get people who are forced to post anonymously if they have something to say that may be regarded unpopular. Anonymous Coward posts are rarely modded very high.

I love Slashdot, it is a useful site. But the kharma system needs serious work.

 

[wordmunger]

You know what *might* work: if some enterprising users (or mods) were to occasionaly post a "best of" comments thread. So when there's a long 400-post discussion that most of us don't have time to wade through (about a particularly juicy rumor, perhaps), maybe someone who's bored could distill it to the 20 or 30 really substantive posts and put it in a new thread.

 

[Jon'sLightBulbs]

Most of the criticism here of the Slashdot ratings system focuses on the potential tyranny of a group of moderators that are either partial to their own agenda or lack sufficient knowledge of the discussion to dispense a rating that is reflective of the insight in the post.

I understand the argument, but if forum members begin to sense uneven or unknowledgable moderating and rating, they can always turn their threshold back to the 1 level. At that setting, they will effectively be viewing threads as the jumble of both gems and banalities that is currently Macrumors.

 

[Mechcozmo]

You know what *might* work: if some enterprising users (or mods) were to occasionaly post a "best of" comments thread. So when there's a long 400-post discussion that most of us don't have time to wade through (about a particularly juicy rumor, perhaps), maybe someone who's bored could distill it to the 20 or 30 really substantive posts and put it in a new thread.

Great, when do you want to start?

At that setting, they will effectively be viewing threads as the jumble of both gems and banalities that is currently Macrumors.

Or, we could just leave it as it is so that we ALWAYS get the full effect of the gems and banalities that is the MacRumors we know and love and wish to keep this way.

Two quotes:

Change is bad.

Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.

 

[devman]

Change is bad..

Hmmm... no improvement is possible without change.

 

[Mechcozmo]

Hmmm... no improvement is possible without change.

When the United States was tested the first hydrogen bomb, they used heavy hydrogen (had extra neutrons, aka, tritium, which is the most common). The people in charge were concerned that it would react with the naturally-occurring tritium in the ocean.
With the words, "Oh, screw it." They pushed the button.

What if the change they had created was blowing up the world?

 

[jackieonasses]

When the United States was tested the first hydrogen bomb, they used heavy hydrogen (had extra neutrons, aka, tritium, which is the most common). The people in charge were concerned that it would react with the naturally-occurring tritium in the ocean.
With the words, "Oh, screw it." They pushed the button.

What if the change they had created was blowing up the world?

My God would that suck.... We would have a ton of oxygen after all of that hydrogen burned up the earth!

kyle

 

[Mechcozmo]

My God would that suck.... We would have a ton of oxygen after all of that hydrogen burned up the earth!

kyle

You and me would be a part of that oxygen.

Change is bad.

EDIT: Unless its a PowerBook G5.

 

[thecow]

You and me would be a part of that oxygen.

Change is bad.

EDIT: Unless its a PowerBook G5.

But which will be hotter? The H bomb or the PB G5?

 

[dotdotdot]

I don't even know how to read Slashdot comments (Can someone PM me explaining how??)

I like these forums the way they are...

 

[Mechcozmo]

But which will be hotter? The H bomb or the PB G5?

Probably the G5 if you start using it at 100% capacity.....

 

[mms]

What if the change they had created was blowing up the world?

Well you did misapply the logic. The original statement, "no improvement is possible without change" didn't ever say that all change is good, or that ALL change creates improvements. It merely stated that improvements by definition are changes in the way things are.

 

[Lacero]

"With great powers come great responsibility."

 

[Mechcozmo]

Well you did misapply the logic. The original statement, "no improvement is possible without change" didn't ever say that all change is good, or that ALL change creates improvements. It merely stated that improvements by definition are changes in the way things are.

Blowing up the world might be an improvement.

"With great powers come great responsibility."

_What_the_hell_