https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20697110/
How? Did the user get 999 positives and it rotated back to -1?
How? Did the user get 999 positives and it rotated back to -1?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
A post made yesterday with a negative rating?
- Thread starter theSeb
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20697110/
How? Did the user get 999 positives and it rotated back to -1?
Image
Admins can down vote but in this case, there was a bug that allowed someone to downvote without permission.
arn
The one place where vote totals make a difference (beyond forum members just noticing them as that scan through a thread) is on article pages, where we display up to ten highest rated comments. Example.
So in those cases, negative votes would cancel out positive votes and bring a comment down that list or drop it off of there entirely.
So in those cases, negative votes would cancel out positive votes and bring a comment down that list or drop it off of there entirely.
What's the point of allowing an admin to down vote, but regular users not? What does that serve? Since not many know this, and say, a post has three up votes, and then suddenly is only has two, the logical conclusion is that one of the up voters changed their mind, when in fact, and unknown person who has the capacity to down vote that no one else has decreased the posts "favorability" rating. That's sneaky and dishonest.
EDIT: ..and even if everyone DID know that admins had the capacity to "down vote", it's still sneaky because, since the voting is anonymous, if a post had three "up votes" and then suddenly only two, you still wouldn't know if it was because someone changed their mind or an admin "down voted" it. And yes, it does matter. These aren't presidential elections, but unequal voting rights on posts just doesn't seem right.
Last edited:
Still, it's pretty ridiculous that such a thing exists. How many admins are there and how many have used it because they didn't agree or like what was being posted? Who knows? Do you? No. You can say "Well I think they have better things to do", but you have no idea whether it's been abused or not. No one does. It's just not right. I'd bet that some have used it. You know, human nature being what it is and all....
This is such a trivial matter! It's not like someone's human rights have been violated. The site owner has the right to do whatever he deems appropriate. This isn't a democracy. We are guests of this forum. While we may not like everything about it, we agreed to abide by its rules.
First, Admins DO have more important things to do than run around the forum, downvoting posts. This is especially true of the post in question, which was not controversial and contained nothing that would represent an opinion opposite someone's viewpoint. In other words, even if an Admin DID want to downvote a post, there is no reason whatsoever to downvote that particular post.
It is far more likely that Admins can downvote posts only because that feature is restricted to forum members, but Admins have complete unrestricted access to all forum features. That doesn't mean they intentionally turned on downvoting for Admins, but rather, it's part of having complete access to all forum functionality.
The whole thing is, as I said, trivial. Who cares what a number beside a particular post is? Without knowing who upvoted or downvoted a post and their reasons for doing so, such votes are useless information and have no relation to the merits of the post content. So many abuses of the voting system have been made that it rendered the whole system meaningless. There have been countless threads where this topic has been beaten to death.
Of course, none of these facts will discourage those who are intent to form a militant uprising over the most insignificant issues. They will find a way, no matter what, to find fault with the forum or its leadership, or the weather, the political party in office, the features (or lack thereof) in Apple hardware or software, and the price of gasoline. In other words, those who want to complain will have no trouble finding something to complain about.
First, Admins DO have more important things to do than run around the forum, downvoting posts. This is especially true of the post in question, which was not controversial and contained nothing that would represent an opinion opposite someone's viewpoint. In other words, even if an Admin DID want to downvote a post, there is no reason whatsoever to downvote that particular post.
It is far more likely that Admins can downvote posts only because that feature is restricted to forum members, but Admins have complete unrestricted access to all forum features. That doesn't mean they intentionally turned on downvoting for Admins, but rather, it's part of having complete access to all forum functionality.
The whole thing is, as I said, trivial. Who cares what a number beside a particular post is? Without knowing who upvoted or downvoted a post and their reasons for doing so, such votes are useless information and have no relation to the merits of the post content. So many abuses of the voting system have been made that it rendered the whole system meaningless. There have been countless threads where this topic has been beaten to death.
Of course, none of these facts will discourage those who are intent to form a militant uprising over the most insignificant issues. They will find a way, no matter what, to find fault with the forum or its leadership, or the weather, the political party in office, the features (or lack thereof) in Apple hardware or software, and the price of gasoline. In other words, those who want to complain will have no trouble finding something to complain about.
Dude, I personally don't believe that posts should be able to be voted on at all, either way. But, if you're going to allow it, do it right, and make it equal for all. That's all I'm saying. You should't be getting bent out of shape over the fact that I questioned this information.
I'm not bent out of shape at all. I'm simply pointing out the obvious fact that some people appear to be upset about a very minor issue. Whether anyone agrees with what voting is allowed or what votes are made, the fact remains that in its present form, the voting system is useless, and not worth getting worked up over.
It's because anyone with basic Javascript knowledge can re-implement down-voting, due to how the website is coded. I discovered that awhile back. Never used it though! Promise. But yah, if you want to remove it for good, you have to completely remove the feature at a lower level than a simple function argument.
But yah, if you want to remove it for good, you have to completely remove the feature at a lower level than a simple function argument.
It's because anyone with basic Javascript knowledge can re-implement down-voting, due to how the website is coded. I discovered that awhile back. Never used it though! Promise.
it's already been fixed, but the whole system is being thrown out soonish with the site migration to Xenforo
arn
It wasn't abused, we've not used it. We have no reason to down-vote anything, and as one member suggested in this thread, we are too busy for that!