Trill is a f*****

davidt

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Subscriber
Possibly, but if the users rates a lot of users then no rule is actually broken. I'm revisiting the rating system with the new site upgrade planning.

@davidt

Remember when we discussed how harassing members violates the TOS? Would you consider abusing the rating system by following members around the forum and marking all their posts as “troll” grounds for harassment? :tongueout:
 

The Truth

about Ruth
Possibly, but if the users rates a lot of users then no rule is actually broken. I'm revisiting the rating system with the new site upgrade planning.
You would serve yourself better by just being vague.. The actual truth as I've experienced it is that you do everything on a case by case basis depending on how you feel at the time, which is totally your right, and I don't know why you don't just say that. I'd have suggested you just left that at "possibly." That's true. It's got lots of wiggle room. It doesn't pretend to be logical and no one could argue with it.
It's easy to see who abuses the rating system. If they abuse the system to rate multiple people it's no different than if they abuse it to rate one person.
I think I understand the idea. A person who is rating many people, based on the content, and not the poster, could potentially give consistent negative ratings to a few people while also giving a mixture of ratings to a number of others. It could become difficult to determine if they're using the system honestly.
Also, it doesn't really matter since it takes multiple negative ratings to hide a post and most people will click on a hidden post anyway. Also, in the case of Uncleskinny, even though many of his posts are hidden, it seems multiple people always reply with a quote so the post actually shows up multiple times in the thread anyway.
But there are a few posters who mostly sign in to give negative ratings and if this is a violation it wouldn't be hard to see that pattern if it was pointed out to you.
I give negative ratings to every post by GodEmperorMorrissey because that person consistently makes racist, homophobic and ignorant posts on a consistent basis. I also give a variety of ratings to other posters. So, am I harassing that user? In a way yes, I am. But I am also honestly participating in the moderation system and I think that is something you said the ratings are for.
The old system of tagging threads required a lot more creativity. The very limited number of characters forced users to dig deep to come up with something clever, descriptive, and funny. Much better than just allowing morons to click "troll" on every post by someone they disagree with. But it was determined that system was being abused. So later another system was put into place that could be abused not only by clever people but by anyone. I realize you didn't switch from one to the other. There was a long break in between. But the point is that the other system was much preferable. I realize also that it's probably a software issue that makes the current system an option and maybe you tagging threads isn't an option anymore.
Still the point is that if the old system was a problem the new one has the same problem but without the entertainment value. The only positive I see about rating posts is that it does make more sense to be able to rate a post than to post "I agree" or something similar.
 

rifke

ladies bear (inquire within)
I would say scanty is a good example of someone who harasses someone with the negative ratings, as in the case of her constantly rating thepoliticalrevolution's posts as redundant or troll (even more than she does mine), despite the fact that I've never seen thepoliticalrevolution say anything at all to scanty, nor does scanty ever really contribute anything to the board (aside from a few negative comments--like telling poli to play in traffic--here and there), nor has TPR ever shown herself deserving of such harassment (as she's never been nasty to anyone). just because you don't like someone or you're jealous because they're better at your schtick than you are and more in the know about fashion doesn't mean that person is a troll or that they're being redundant.
 

The Truth

about Ruth
I would say scanty is a good example of someone who harasses someone with the negative ratings, as in the case of her constantly rating thepoliticalrevolution's posts as redundant or troll (even more than she does mine), despite the fact that I've never seen thepoliticalrevolution say anything at all to scanty, nor does scanty ever really contribute anything to the board (aside from a few negative comments--like telling poli to play in traffic--here and there), nor has TPR ever shown herself deserving of such harassment (as she's never been nasty to anyone). just because you don't like someone or you're jealous because they're better at your schtick than you are and more in the know about fashion doesn't mean that person is a troll or that they're being redundant.
Play in traffic.
 
Top Bottom