77 comments on Poll: What do you think of the comment rating system?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
77 comments on Poll: What do you think of the comment rating system?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.”
—Gandhi
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Good post. I didn't answer, that's my choice.
Go TOD ! Let's speak our mind !
The New Rating System is Awesome. I used to only read this blog once a month, but now I have to check in 3 times a day, just to check how others rated me "Speaking my mind." Go TOD!
I preffered the first one, where you clicked on the arrows. This one has radio buttons and makes the page refresh. That's not good for thoes of us with a slow connection.
Besides the technical, the system just seems to be a way of voting down people who don't agree with the regulars. I already see TOD as starting to become elitist and narrow-minded. This anonymous 'comment judge' is just going to make it worse.
Agreed. I think it's a dangerous change most likely encouraging group-think. In the thread above this one I already saw an example of a post being voted down because it ran against conventional wisdom, though I thought the arguments made interesting and reasonable. If people actively get judged on their contributions, they're bound to either become conscious of what other people think of them, or revel in being independent of it. This leads to people adjusting their posts for social acceptance, or people rebelling, gleeful at their opposition to the 'mainstream' (I'm thinking of InfinitePossibilities as a poster here).
I prefer contributions to be attacked or supported on their factual merit through reasoned replies, not the emotional agreement it induces from a self-organising baseline group via a rating system.
Promoting group-think will be the most likely outcome. TOD already has some pretty strong "mainstream" believes like ELM and the mainstream does not like to be challenged.
Does an up / down vote mean?
- I like / dislike the style the argument was brought forward - down with inappropriate jokes from intercultural trolls
- I like / dislike what the author is saying content-wise - down with global warming is caused by humans deniers
- I like / dislike the amount of time and thinking the author has invested to present new analysis or comments - down with people writing brief messages without giving all the details
The point-system brings simplicity to a rather complex matter. But, I will immediately endorse it, if someone were to proof that humans are very good in immediately understanding new solutions to complex problems they have so far not really understood, joyfully abandoning the simplistic solutions they used beforehand to endow themselves with a sense of control in a complex world...
If the system were to deal only with "ettiquette", eg style and politeness of the text written, that might be helpful. But keep in mind as Luhmann pointed out, one should never infer the validity of the content from the validity of the form.
Well said,
I notice the conucopians very quickly build up negative feedback which might well put them off from posting again.
Although I dont agree with them on most points I would still prefer that they did not feel in anyway intimidated about posting.
Yeah, making the page refresh is PITA, even for people with fast connections, because it nukes all the "new" flags.
Though I suppose it has the benefit of making sure you don't rate a post unless it's really important to you.
The ratings are anonymous to avoid retaliation - downrating all of someone else's posts because they downrated yours. And vice-versa, I suppose - uprating someone's post because they uprated yours.
Though perhaps a better way of dealing with that would be to limit the number of comments each user can rate per day, to force people to be more thoughtful in how they rate posts.