POLL: Do you think voting on posts should be open to all?

[Pierce89]

But it's not democratic. We can't vote for who the mods are, who owns the site, where it's hosted or vote to change the rules and terms and conditions. There's nothing democratic about this site. The mods allow us to cast votes on posts (to which they have veto rights). Thats the long and short of it. Choose to play or not. Don't choose to complain.

Do you understand ostensibly?

[Cam]

Apparently or purportedly, but perhaps not actually. It's an adverb.

You used that term, but overall you still believe you have a democratic right to have your vote listed and maintained, to which you think it's unfair when the reverse happens.

Its totally arbitrary, but only for those in "power". Why should X lose points(or myself) because once a mod created a forum with a title that invited some humour, some people had fun joking around. Other people thought it was funny and entertaining, so they gave many upvotes.

[Dragonfly]

I told from the moment the idea emerged that it is a silly kindergarten game and maintain that position.
Not that I am very clever but I have seen it in practice, seen how passionate and productive user get votes while seldom writing but worthy contributors do not, seen how it is used on the base of liking and nor actual contents, and as one of the admins of the forum (a local one) acted to disable voting.
BTW have you noticed that the pure technical subforums are in a decline?

[strad]

I also had a few humorous posts down voted. I think try to remember where you are - F1 "Technical". Funny quips and satirical one liners - while funny - don't really add value to a technical thread. So I understand why a down vote in that instance.

Maybe start a new thread specifically for one liners - quote a thread post and have at it. But do it away from the original thread so it does not waste the time of others who legitimately want the technical information.

But Cam...out of context they wouldn't be funny.
There is nothing at all wrong with making the joke or light hearted comment.
And I have never seen the place where you are not allowed to have driver nicknames....Every announcer in every language does.

[Cam]

@strad - again, I don't make the rules mate, I just try to work within them.

Calling someone "horse face' and "Down Syndrome" and "Mongoloid" is not funny - even though it's in context with the driver they are referring too. I'm certainly up to seeing funny comments in the thread. In my game, being humorous usually gets the message across a lot stronger - however I can see the mods taking the angle they do and they're entitled to do so. Whether I agree or not is a none issue.

From what I can see, people put more effort into complaining rather than researching and posting great info. I'm suggesting people try that first. I know my posts are sometimes wrong and controversial and off topic too, so I'm not perfect either, but I'm trying to help the forum by offering different views and food for thought, not just constantly picking up the bad points and running with it - in there lies the distinction and I think the mods get that too.

[xpensive]

@strad - again, I don't make the rules mate, I just try to work within them.
...

This will most probably cost me a vote or three, but I wonder who you really are, or are you just cruising for a job as mod?

[Cam]

Not at all. I don't envy what the mods do. I simply see to from their point of view and don't understand why people argue a point that's moot. The mods have stated that good posts will equal votes, yet rather than try that as an experiment to see if it works, they just continue to cast blame and complaints. I'm hoping my posts will 'steer' them into seeing the voting system another way and move on to providing good info.

[Pierce89]

Apparently or purportedly, but perhaps not actually. It's an adverb.

You used that term, but overall you still believe you have a democratic right to have your vote listed and maintained, to which you think it's unfair when the reverse happens.

Its totally arbitrary, but only for those in "power". Why should X lose points(or myself) because once a mod created a forum with a title that invited some humour, some people had fun joking around. Other people thought it was funny and entertaining, so they gave many upvotes.

I have no beliefs one way or the other about my rights on someone else's website. However, a "voting system" on a website is a democratic style presentation. Here the voting system is circumvented by the "power". Hence "ostensibly democratic". Its like Ahmadinejad's recent "re-election".

P.S. For the crazy's, I'm in no way comparing Richard,Tomba, or anyone else to an evil dictator.

[Cam]

I think, as long as people understand that the voting rights are an ability (or function) and not a right, people should understand. It's clear the mods are using carrot and stick approach, although some are a little harder to get that through.

[beelsebob]

Why should any threads be suppressed? Every member is here for a love of F1 and its technology. If people are enjoying making jokes about "Norby the Hut", you should recognize they are only joking. The only people who take the driver debate seriously are the same ones complaining. People enjoy blowing off steam around somewhat like minded individuals.

Because of the unending problem of the internets – staying on topic. It takes a lot of effort to keep discussion on one single topic on the internet, and often requires some fairly draconian measures. I'm guessing you don't want people talking about their favourite cheese grater, or the cuteness of a kitten around here do you? The issue is then where to draw the line... The guys who created this site defined the line as being technical content plus a small amount of sillyness, I can quite understand them then suppressing threads that turn into large amounts of sillyness, or discussions about kittens.

[beelsebob]

@strad - again, I don't make the rules mate, I just try to work within them.
...

This will most probably cost me a vote or three, but I wonder who you really are, or are you just cruising for a job as mod?

Anyone who has ever run an online service will understand where the mods are on this. He's 100% right that the majority of people on t'internet spend most of their time whining rather than getting on and doing something productive, and useful. So, along with Cam... Nothing to see here, move along, go post something technical!

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

For me, I see it as working very well so far, for a few reasons
1) It encourages people to make quality posts, not a quantity of posts as the old system did.
2) It really does encourage technical posts – my reputation doubled simply by making one post with some good solid stats in it rather than just guess work.
3) It allows people to suppress the stupid driver/mercedes threads easily.

I disagree. This has nothing to do with "technical" posts. People get up votes or down votes for simple agree/disagrees.
You then also have pals who up vote each others posts. It's very easy to see whom, and to needn't have been around here long to work it out. I'm sure the mods have the stats, and it would be very interesting reading the percentage of votes from a particular poster to another.
As for surpression of said "driver/Mercedes" threads, why should these be censured if there proper honest to goodness debate.
If your going to start talking about "the boss" or "norby the hut", "Max's spannerman" then I switch off. You cannot criticise a team/driver without facts. Stating facts in these debates is necessary for decent outcomes.

By not having these threads, I would guess the traffic directed to this site would halve. A necessary evil you may call, but if done in the correct fashion can add to the quality of the site.

And no worries, I won't downvote because I disagree .....

Why should any threads be suppressed? Every member is here for a love of F1 and its technology. If people are enjoying making jokes about "Norby the Hut", you should recognize they are only joking. The only people who take the driver debate seriously are the same ones complaining. People enjoy blowing off steam around somewhat like minded individuals.

I didn't say it should be surpressed. Quite the opposite in fact.

@beelsebob

It's not my place to point out, but your last few posts on this thread appear to have been written on some god like pedestal.
X has his moments when it comes to being mischievous, but as technical poster, he has you licked.
I don't mean this as nasty, but I clicked on your name, and found you post mainly in the GP threads. There be the place near totally devoid of technical discussion! I cant Click on the "vote history" icon, sadly. But will it show me these 20 posts of yours that where deemed technically useful? It's an observation, and one not intended to insult, but for perspective as some people have more polarised opinions, and are then subject to more downvotes, even if they are a more technical poster.

[Cold Fussion]

Every forum I've ever been apart of, the rating system has only ever caused problems. This forum has by far and the way the worst implementation of any forum I've seen where it actually even matter what people vote for, it's the mods who ultimately decide and that is pretty appalling. I also have the ability to determine for myself what posts I think are good, so what everyone else thinks is irrelevant to my viewing habits.

[Mr Alcatraz]

I think I set a record at the beginning of FP1. I received a message saying I had been promoted and I closed the window and saw a big fat goose egg I clicked on the divice that keeps records and it had been voted off in 3 minute's and there wer only three of us on the thread

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

@ mr Alcatraz

Ok so I'm going to use your post as an example, I hope you don't mind?

You mentioned one compound being quicker than another then asked ray if his data corroborates that.

Nothing wrong with that. But someone thought it was technical(lol), and someone disagrees(lol).
I don't see how it is technical, as there is no explanation as to why(forgive me for saying) and I don't see how someone can disagree without offering an alternative!