Why do you give, or take, points on posts?

[DwayneEMTP]

Hey all,

I was thinking today about the reasons that I give and take points on posts and was wondering if others have a standard way, or if it's just more or less how you feel about a certainl post.

For instance I like to give positives to posts that go above and beyond when answering a person's questions. For example, I +1 many of chbare's posts as he will often go into in depth explanations that many levels of providers can understand. Or someone that posts an explanation along with links to further explain or validate it.

Also, I tend to like uncommon opinions. I +1 many contrary opinions that come with explanations.

I find too that I'm not +1ing people that I believe show balls when posting. Regular posters that post a thread that they know is likely to get bashed, but post it anyway because there's something to learn from it. Or the newer posters that may get lightly, or more harshly criticized, yet continue in the thread...I think that this is my favorite poster of all, as I remember how delicate my ego was when I first started posting here...I was often terrified to have even one more person tell me what an ignorant douche I was....

So, anyway, those are my reasons for positives. Do you all use those? Or different ones? Or disagree with these?

I rarely give negatives..only when it it seems obvious to me that someone is trying to be stupid or bring bad energy...

Whatcha think?

Dwayne

[CPhT]

I'm probably a little bit simpler when it comes to +/- 1 ratings. I basically use it like Facebook, with the addition of a 'dislike' button. I wouldn't say that I down-rank a post that I necessarily dislike, but if I think a person is deliberately trolling (thankfully not that common here) or being needlessly dramatic, I'll down-rank it. Up-ranking is simple; make me laugh or make me think.

[Eydawn]

If I disagree with an opinion, but it's well phrased, it gets a +1. If it's spot on with an answer that someone's really refusing to pay attention to (but they really need to), it gets a +1. Funny stuff usually doesn't get a +1 unless there's some other merit in there. I reverse a lot of -1's that I don't think were warranted, especially with folks who are just getting their posting feet on the ground... so I waste a lot of +1's on reversing stupid, reactive downvotes. Think before you give rep, yo! Seriously. Give people some time- they'll demonstrate whether they need to get smacked or not, don't do it right out the gate unless they're a total troll...

Negatives are reserved for recalcitrant repetitive ignorance, blatant trolling, and hateful posts. Takes a lot to get me to give one, really.

Wendy

CO EMT-B

[DwayneEMTP]

Excellent post Wendy, I'd forgotten about +1ing those that I felt had been smacked for being right but unpopular instead of being wrong.

Actually, I just reread your post and it wish that it was added as instructions for using the function.

Dwayne

[Lone Star]

When I rate a post, I tend to look at things like:

1. How well was the post written?

2. How well did the poster present their ideas/response?

3. If presenting fact, can they back their position with references/logic?

4. If presenting a rebuttal, is their position backed with logic, or is it a 'knee-jerk reaction'?

I've posted some things on this forum over the years that weren't very popular, I've posted from that 'knee-jerk emotional reaction' place and have been smacked square between the eyes for it. I'd like to think that I"ve learned a lesson from that.

I 'don't believe in candy coating things just to make them more palatable, but I don't believe in beating someone down because their viewpoint is different than mine.

I don't simply '+1' a post because they're a friend of mine, nor do I simply '-1' a post because I don't like the poster. I'd really like to believe that I'm judicious in my ratings, and that the poster has actually earned the rating I've given. I would also like to think that I've given far more 'positives' than I have 'negatives' in the process.

No, not everything I say is going to be well received, nor is it automatically giong to be automatically dismissed as nothing more than drivel cluttering up the forums.

As far as posting a rating to negate another person's rank; that's akin to telling the 'rater' that they really don't feel that way about the post.

My criteria for an automatic 'negative' is about as simple as the 'positive criteria' is:

1. Is the poster INTENTIONALLY trying to cause drama, discord or incite an argument?

2. Is the poster INTENTIONALLY refusing to listen to a loical argument against their position?

3. Is the poster INTENTIONALY avoiding ignoring requests for references to support their position?

4. Is the poster INTENTIONALLY being obtuse to cause discontent and discord (trolling)?

I've recieved far more 'positives' in my 'reputation' around here, but I've also had my share of 'negatives' along the way. I'm pretty sure I've earned the majority of the positives and negatives based on the QUALITY of my postings, as opposed to being 'gifted' them simply beause the person was either being kind or because the rater considers me a friend....

[DFIB]

I don't give a lot of +1 or -1 either. I don't give a post a +1 for content. Most of the posters here are pretty smart so writing things that are correct should be expected. Then again even a clock is right twice a day.

I give points for post that are particularly courageous in an intellectual and emotional way. I give points when the poster makes a real effort even if they might be a little off. I take points when people are being pointlessly mean and the intention of their post is not constructive but clearly intended to cause harm.

[Vorenus]

I have no real set concept regarding this.

I guess +1 gets posts that are really thought through, correct and have some real effort put into.

I seldomly give -1, the posts that get this are mostly BS...

[island emt]

I give a + when the poster deserves credit for going above the minimum. Those that make a post and continue to learn from others.

I give a - to all the derelicts who come here as posers and intentionally try to be counter productive, are just rude, or are not giving any positive benefit to the site.

[spenac]

I'm easy with the +1 for new posters. I also reverse as Wendy mentioned when I think someone got a negative for no real reason. I also negative all Dwayne's posts. Just kidding or am I?

Really negatives are reserved for idiotic posts especially attacks.

[Chief1C]

Did ya ever need a good rant? What's better, ranting in person or ranting with your fingers?

I come to two conclusions. One - People always say more in text, than they will to your face. Two - I don't give a flying monkey's butt how people perceive my text words, nor do I care how they feel about it; provided I'm not attacking the individual person. Go ahead and tell me why you disagree, disapprove, et al; on something with experience, education or fact based evidence; - or be a lazy bastard and give a negative mark. I honestly only value the opinion of certain folks, and they gain my e-respect by seeing how they:

1. Interact with other users
   
2. Accept the position of other users
   
3. Think outside the box
   
4. Not a douche
   
5. Not a bigot, excessively racist; in-your-face-with-my-opinion nature or not excessively in your face religious
   

If I see someone as an @$$hole, I'm less likely to care what they have to say, meaning what their opinion is of what I have to say. However, I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.

Sometimes, I fly off my hinge, search a user, and negative all their posts that I can, just because they're such a terrible douche, that I think everyone needs to know this by their level of negatives. Just sayin.

Edited January 29, 2012 by 2c4