As after the introduction of the rating system, I was pleasantly surprised, actual crap posts were downvoted and others were upvoted, podts that are actually good. As over time good posters got higher and higher ratings, and at some point have a good enough rating to downvote posts. Well, I do not know what the actual number is for that, but over time more and more people will have the ability to downvote posts. This now reached so far that there are people seriously abusing the rating system.
I have noticed it since a few days, and most of the time I try to rectify wrong downvotes by upvoting the posts(since I barely vote).
note: The posts quoted here are merely used to show my opinion and are in no way meant to offend the poster
This case is well seen in the following topic:
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =1&t=14567
To see the opening post;
This post, in my opinion a decent post, nothing great about it, nothing wrong about it. This one was downvoted twice(and I upvoted it once).bill shoe wrote:If money played no role, only talent, who would race F1 in 2013?
Juan Pablo Montoya (higher level with better fitness and focus)
Robin Frijns (potential to move up)
Jules Bianchi (potential to move up)
Didn't make cut but almost-
OK, there's 22 that made the cut. Don't worry about the exact level. If you add one to the list then you have to remove one. I think I'm missing too many non-F1 drivers such as DTM, Sports Cars, etc.
And then the following post:
This one is uprated once. In what way is this post so great that it deserves to be upvoted? Nothing, there is no quality in the post at all, yet it is upvoted.Just_a_fan wrote:To be honest, any world champion must be in the A group. Even the dubious one like Button.
Then this post, my own:
It isnt a quality post, but neither is it fanboyism on in any way bad that it deserves a downvote, yet it is downvoted once.wesley123 wrote:I dont think so. The group A of what bill shoe posted are those that are simply the best, a driver that is consistently better than the rest, and honestly, Button is no way in that class. He is a very good driver, but more like a Webber, he is good and can win a world title when he would be able to, but is in no way damned quick in every possible situation.Just_a_fan wrote:To be honest, any world champion must be in the A group. Even the dubious one like Button.
With that said, that makes Vettel's ranking in the A's a bit doubtfull. Yes he has been quick, and damned quick. But was it the case when his car was lesser(like early 2012)? To me no, he is quick when his car is, unlike Alonso or an Hamilton, who are always quick, and can drive around problems they are having.
I agree with most of bills choices, however I dont think Grosjean should be in the C. Also we could put Hulkenberg in B(people praise him, dont ask me why, and I dont really agree with it).
Also Paffett? no not really, also Bourdais is doubtful. Paffett has pretty much only simulator experience and his last open wheel race is at least 10 years ago(?).
Perez in D too, no way. Perez has had its ups and downs and will grow, so should at least be a C or maybe even a B.
I'm not going to pick my 22, simply because it is not possible. I am confident there are a crap load of drivers out there(in GP2 for example) that are as quick as Massa for example.
We continue on with the following post:
This one is upvoted. I mean, really? This particular post shows the abuse really well. There is no quality at all in the post, if it deserves any rating at all it would be a downvote. Why, you ask me? Because of the way it is stated it invites figths and fanboyism. It's content isnt any better than the post of Just a fan quoted earlier in this post, but at least his one was opinion, and not inviting to fanboyism. Posts like the last one I quoted are the reason the voting system exists in the first place, and it also show really well how it doesnt work anymore.xDama wrote:Raikkonen & Schumacher in B-class, but Hamilton in A.
Then this post comes, due to it's low rating it is hidden at default(rated -2):
This post is another one that isnt great, neither is total crap that it deserves to be downvoted, yet it is.Nando wrote:Titles is a testament to how many great cars you have driven and less what your actual skills are.clipsy1H wrote:How can someone think drivers with consecutive titles aren't good enough to be in first group????
And then there is this one:
Once again downvoted, but the post is neither crap or great. Also Nando seems to notice the same thing I do.Nando wrote:If anyone can win with a fundamentally good car? Yes. the rest of the guys are not incompetent, they are the creme de la creme of open wheel drivers.clipsy1H wrote:and??? check what car had Michael and Kimi.... or do you think if car is good anyone can win title??? that's funny. You mean that Vettel isn't now the best driver on the grid?? just because Red bull is best car?
Even Narain would win races in the RB7.
I honestly can´t see how anyone can say Vettel is the best driver on the grid. It´s completely incomprehensible to me.
Edit: now you get downvoted because of differing opinions... great forum this..no abusing of power what so ever...no no.
Gotta love the fact the person then tries to talk to you as if i would have any thoughts about responding to that type of person.
And we move on to another one:
Just giving his opinion, nothing more or less. He didnt even tell why so there wasnt any fuel for fanboyism, just simply his rating. And guess what? Yes, it was downvoted.Nando wrote:In no particular order in the various categories.
Schumacher (present time)
Maldonado - super quick but overall still have a lot of work to do
Grosjean - same as Maldo.
Nothing bad and nothing great really, but it was downvoted.beelsebob wrote:Right, and I think that's a completely flawed understanding of what "Best Driver" means. If that's what it means, then the skills a driver needs to be the best are being psychic, and able to predict the future. Not actually being able to drive.raymondu999 wrote:Nando, I have to say I read clipsy's post different than how you (seem to me to) have read it. I do not believe he is asserting Vettel as the best driver of the grid at the moment - but rather the reasoning that having the fastest car somehow discounts the driver. Even a driver driving the best car could also be the best driver. At least that's how I read clipsy's statement.
This post is upvoted. What is so great about it?raymondu999 wrote:You also misread my post, beelsebob.
My point is, it's possible that the best driver of the grid gets the best car of the grid. Therefore, it is possible that the best car is driven by the best driver. Therefore, best car does not mean non-best driver.
My conclusion is:
The voting system had an positive start, but as time moves on more and more people get voting rights, and more and more people get downvoting rights. And now we see the voting system turn into a system of opinion and whether or not you agree with a post, instead of the quality of a post.