I still think we need to be able to make negative recommendations

[cornermouse]

on threads. That is, take away recommendations from posts that we think foolish, hateful, or not value. Maybe even have them fall off the regular category into a dirtbag category reserved for nothing but them.

[havocmom]

1. I'd be ok with negative Rs but not taking away positive ones

That would amount to censorship and not my cup of tea. Sorta like: 'who cares what you think', it smacks of bushthink

[rug]

2. I still think we need to be able to reach through the screen and smack people.

[merh]

7. Your idea is the best one

the rest of it is just petty popularity bull, your idea is going to the root and personal responsibility and all that.

:freak:

[cornermouse]

8. Sometimes....

lol. I'm sure there are people who would like to return the favor as well. B-)

[Hepburn]

12. LOL....

...:rofl: Install such a program and I will try you first, OK??? :hi:

[rug]

14. You have to get past my firewall.

:hi:

[Orangepeel]

3. Me, too. I think there should need to be a NET positive of some number to get on the greatest page

I also think that the number to get on the greatest page should be increased. If everything is great, nothing is great.

[rucky]

4. The star system works pretty well on alot of other sites.

then it's not just a popularity contest.

[BlooInBloo]

5. Doesn't make sense for primary season. Then you would just have pro-majority (Obama) threads.

.... and pro-minority (Clinton) threads being voted to the bottom. Even if the split is close, that'll still be the long-term equilibrium.

Once silly season is over, I'm down with the idea.

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. Negative recommendations: when an echo chamber just isn't enough.

[RC]

9. And while we are at it, make

seniority here count also. :evilgrin:Works for me.

[shadowknows69]

10. Yeah, because what this place needs is more opportunity for negative feelings

[cornermouse]

11. I think it could contribute to a feeling of empowerment.

What we've got isn't working that well now.

[shadowknows69]

13. Why not?

Read what you want, comment on what you want, reccomend what you want. I'm sorry if your candidate might not be the favorite on here but why should we level more hatred at people we don't agree with other than what our words can tell. If you really need to anonymously poke someone on an internet board that badly, may I suggest you could need another hobby or two.

[Quixote1818]

16. The negative votes don't show up. They would just cancle out positive votes. nt

[shadowknows69]

19. I just fear DU "death squads" that go after certain authors they have a grudge against

There are too many good writers on here to allow some of their stuff to sink to oblivion because of petty grudges. I count you in that group Quixote.

[Quixote1818]

15. I agree, I have said this for months now.

A thread will be completely idiotic and have 100 people saying it sucks but if just 5 people want to irritate people they can get it on the greatest page. That is ridiculous.

[shadowknows69]

17. If there's a balanced way to do it that doesn't single out individuals

[Zachstar]

18. You mean like digg which has been under fire for that feature?

Several digg articles have been buried to Oblivion by groups either hired or volunteered.

People are pissed about it because companies or even whole countries have been doing so. Such as China burying pro-tibet articles if the rumor is correct.