Official explanation for removal of voting on articles please!

[maflynn]

I liked the voting because it was a great reflection of the forums view

Not really as posted by rdowns

 

[wordoflife]

I like voting on articles (and posts) but people are too biased to make a sensible vote. For example, a post that contains the word "Android" in it probably would receive a negative voting here on MR.

 

[MattInOz]

Awesome xUKHCx, thanks! Arn, I think people are missing out on the "Top Comments" because you'd expect to see that when clicking on "Comments" rather than the article title, which for most people, there's no reason to do so unless you were forwarded the link. Simply being able to sort comments once you click on "Comments" on an article is the protocol nowadays, with the default sort set to "most popular".

I think the Top Comments feature are been pretty miss-able so far.
Following the same logic as article voting, people vote on all sorts of random criteria. So a small group can effect what shows by some organized voting.

Edit:Instead of article voting how about a reader tagging system. Everyone gets to type a one words reaction. The more popular the tag the larger it gets in the soup.

 

[blipper]

I liked the article voting; it wasn't "meaningful" but it was fun to express attitude --- like booing when Hamen's name is said.

 

[Tux Kapono]

Coming up with a handful of examples of when positives/negatives isn't effective as the reason to get rid of it entirely is like telling someone not to use email because you get spam. Wish I could find the Daily Show piece that covered this brilliantly.

Not really as posted by rdowns

 

[Alaerian]

You still haven't touched on this - what did the voting mean?

That's the thing - it meant nothing. There is no reason to have it.