I like that lineCam wrote:People who have so little power in real life tend to wield it like Saddam whenever they can.
That, for me, is what the voting is for. If you think a post has merit, vote for it. If you think someone is just being a smart a$$ for no other reason than to be a smart a$$, then down vote it. Voting is a good thing, because peopel will see it and should consider what it says more or less, than a zero post. But this comes at a cost of morons who down vote for no other reason than to 'punish' you. But such is life.Moxie wrote:I judge the posts as I read them, and form my own opinion about which posters tend to provide useful information, and well developed opinions.
I believe I have mentioned before that there is indeed a bug with the count of votes on threads. It's known and will be worked on, but some other things will be introduced first. The problem is, for instance, when posts are moved by a mod, the thread ratings are not recalculated, hence we end up with incorrect totals. Individual post ratings and member ratings are correct though (afaik).Cam wrote:Think there might be another bug - either that or I'm going crazy.
Example: thread "F1 Performance: is it the car, is it the driver?" - shows 35 points - but going through the thread and counting the +1's and -1's equals 6 (when I did it) - so where has the 35 come from ? Also, the thread did actually display 6 yesterday and then an hour after I looked, it displayed 35. This corresponded with a big reputation change for me from 102 to 95. Down votes are ok - but I cannot see 7 down votes in my reputation change history, during that hours time, to reflect that.
Can you confirm this is happening or is it something on my end i.e. cache or similar?
Thanks hollus!hollus wrote:This seems to be a case of somebody thinking you were wrong and downvoting as "factually wrong". I guess that was meant for misinformation, hard wrong facts, while here you just gave your opinion. You used the magical words "I think" that we don't see often enough over here.
I guess as more and more people get downvoting rights we'll see more of it. As mentioned many times, the system has an inherent noise and one shouldn't get too hot over any upvote or downvote, but I guess that's easier said than done when it is the first vote one gets!
In any case, the system seems to be magically self-correcting
.... which is exactly why the site now requires a reason for a negative ratingWaikeCU wrote:... people know who and why it happened. Giving a -1 without letting somebody know feels like a backstab.
How old? I had a sudden dislike for February winter test thread's perfectly innocent comment about car gossips/insider info. OK you don't like it, fine, that is your god given right, I can't complain but why do you read this thread in May ?Pierce89 wrote:As an aside, it seems someone has downvoted 4 old posts of mine in a 1 hour period. They were all old posts. Some people....have issues.
Steven and all, do you think seeing the reason is a good idea? I mean, I was surfing over the forum today and I spot a post which is -1. I read it, but honestly I couldn't find a good reason why it is downvoted (sorry, I can't find the exact post right now). So I wondered why. Shall we / can we / should we display the reason why a post was downvoted?Steven wrote:.... which is exactly why the site now requires a reason for a negative ratingWaikeCU wrote:... people know who and why it happened. Giving a -1 without letting somebody know feels like a backstab.