Let's ban these stupid "Rec if you think..." threads, dammit.

[Jackpine Radical]

They serve no discernable purpose other than maybe to inflate the egos of the people who start them, and they constitute a form of noise that distorts and diminishes the informational value of the "Greatest" page.

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. Should we recommend your post if we think you are right?

Just askin' :shrug:

[CatWoman]

2. I'll give JR

the benefit of the doubt. :)

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Well, since it has "Rec if you think..." in the subject line,

maybe you should put it on Ignore.

[Le Taz Hot]

3. I don't know about banning them

but we should certainly discourage them. It's really sort of pathetic.

[Jackpine Radical]

9. I'm not big on banning things in general; I just want people to quit

doing the damn things. The first time might have been cute or something. Now it's just an annoyance.

Or maybe it's just that with the relief of having Obama in office, my naturally curmudgeonly soul has the luxury of focusing its crankiness on trivialities like this.

[endarkenment]

5. Rec this thread if you think "rec this thread if you think" threads should be banned.

You had a perfect opportunity there and you just let it slip by.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. Yeah, I know, but I was more interested in making my point

than in creating a self-referential paradox.

[thesquanderer]

51. I did that a few months ago ("rec this if you think 'rec this' should be banned")

I didn't get many recs. ;-)

I did get some replies of support, though.

I do think it devalues the front page, and I would support a moderator-imposed ban. They should at least be banished from the top 5 greatest threads list that appears on the front page.

[panader0]

6. Rec if you like Obama; Rec if you hate bush; Rec if you eat pie

I'm with you Jack

[progressoid]

22. Pie? Where?

Mmmm, I like pie. Homer likes pie. The President likes pie.

Must K/R any pie related threads.

[dipsydoodle]

7. Yes

pure unadulterated ego trips x(

[thesquanderer]

58. ego trips

Yes... to me, they are lke the spam emails that ask you to send something to everyone you know, where all the poster really cares about is seeing how many of the things he can get out there.

Some are obvious (like when they say something bad will happen to you if you don't), some are filled with false info (love the ones that say "it's real! check scopes" and scopes confirms it's a fraud) -- my friends sometimes send them to me thinking they're doing good ("make sure your friends know about the new virus!") -- I just tell people, if it ever says to send to everyone you know, just assume it's junk and don't send it to me!

I don't know why people get a kick out of seeing how many people they can get to do things, but they do. "Rec this" is the same kind of annoying behavior.

[nilram]

10. Absolutely, thanks for that.

And then can we work on the "Read This -- NOW" threads? I just wish there was an ignore checkbox on the Greatest page.

[rurallib]

11. Amen Jackpine!

[Javaman]

12. K & R!!! LOLOLOL

:rofl:

[Marrah_G]

13. They are obnoxious.

There is a POLL fuction for people that aren't to lazy to start one.

I never recommend posts asking for recommends.

[stubtoe]

24. I won't even read them, let alone recommend them.

n/t

[raccoon]

14. I strongly agree. nt

[madinmaryland]

15. K&R&B!!

[FatDave]

16. All we have to do is not rec them.

Then they will go away.

[Jackpine Radical]

19. The problem with that theory is

that I have not been reccing them since they started showing up, and they are still here. In a population of 140,000, all it takes is one in a thousand with an itchy mouse finger, and the problem persists.

[DemBones DemBones]

31. A good suggestion from zipplewrath is that there be

a limit on the number of recs a poster can do per day. That would slow down the folks with itchy mouse fingers (which sounds a bit like a bizarre medical condition.)

[thesquanderer]

53. limit won't do it

I thought there was already a limit on the number of threads someone can rec, but maybe that was another site.

Anyway, I don't see a rec limit as a fix. People will still do it, I'm sure. And a small limit is actually more stifling of free speech, if you will, than preventing these no-info threads.

[DemBones DemBones]

17. I'm with you. The signal to noise ratio here

needs improvement. Too many threads on one topic are also a problem. Why start another "I hate Rick Warren" thread when there are already five or six?

:kick: and R

[zipplewrath]

21. I don't see alot of solutions

Moderation could be one method, but that takes alot of work on their part. We could limit who can recommend, or limit the amount of recommending (per day or whatever) that any one person can do (a recommend "budget" so to speak). I suspect some automated measure to detect "greatest" threads instead of just nominating them might work. Most read/responded/etc. or even some sense of "spike" elimination (i.e. alot of recs over a very short period of time doesn't "count" for long as oppose to sustained recommendation over a longer period of time.)

I've even wished for some sorting of some kind. Most recommended section, most read, most commented upon (especially in the sense of more than just "you betcha nt." One simple filter could be counting the total number of different people responding, as oppose to 5 folks having a side conversation.)

I'm afraid though we are seeing some effect of the "Facebook generation". Peoples concept of a networking site like this is that they are suppose to post items like "I'm watching Michele right now". There is probably an area for that kind of thing, but promoting those to any sort of "greatest" page may be inappropriate.

[DemBones DemBones]

30. The only workable solution I see is

for posters to be more responsible. Everyone who starts threads is going to start duplicate threads occasionally even if they scan the page before posting but more scanning before posting would cut down on the number of duplicates. The mods have enough to do dealing with dupes in LBN, asking them to police GD and GDP probably is too much, as you indicated.

I like your idea of limiting the number of threads a poster can recommend per day. That shouldn't be difficult for the admins to implement and it would help a great deal.

[zipplewrath]

36. multiple methods

I don't think you'll get very far trying to modify the personalities and behaviors of 140K+ users. However, implimenting limits is more workable. You could limit recommendations per day, or decrease the "weight" a recommendation has based upon the total number given. You could give them a daily budget and when they recommend, they have to indicate the amount of that budget they want to allocate to that thread.

[thesquanderer]

55. moderation

re: "Moderation could be one method, but that takes alot of work on their part."

I'm pretty sure a moderator reads each post anyway, so it's no more work.

Though they could also build in a simple algorithm that prevents posts with the phrase "rec if" "recommend if" and "k/r if" in the subject line, giving the poster a message saying that these messages are no longer supported.

[monmouth]

18. I don't even open them to read...n/t

[Iggo]

20. Yep, they make the greatest page look stupid.

[MilesColtrane]

23. I don't like them, generally don't read them, and absolutely don't recommend them.

They serve no purpose and crowd out posts I might actually want to read first.

[surrealAmerican]

25. I don't like them either, but I guess some people must ...

... or they wouldn't get those rec's. Maybe there should be a "Rec if" forum, to keep them from cluttering up GD. If they were all in one forum that would make it easier to keep them off the "greatest" page.

[Jackpine Radical]

28. I like that idea.

Thjat plus an Ignore Forum option would work wonders for my disposition.

[Nye Bevan]

26. Even if they are not banned, they should be excluded from the "Greatest" page

"Rec if you think Bush is an asshole"......oooh look, I got 60 recs and I'm on the Greatest page!......I'm soooooo popular!!!

[bvar22]

27. Begging for Recs in the Subject Line....

...is an open admission that the post has no merit.

...like a performer begging for applause BEFORE his performance.

"Please clap for me.
I know I have no talent, and I really SUCK at this,
but I would really like to know what it feels like to be applauded.
I KNOW I'll never earn it on my own."


Recommend this post if you agree!

[Initech]

29. Rec this thread if you think you should rec this thread.

[hootinholler]

32. When I start a thread like this it gets locked or deleted.

I whole heartedly agree.

-Hoot

[cynatnite]

33. Exactly! n/t

[Pluvious]

34. yes yes

MAKE THEM STOP !

It's so fucking annoying and pathetic !

It's something Bush would do - so there !!!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

35. I hate 'em too. It's like, if you DON't respond you will be categorized

as unsympathetic or anti-something. What if you just don't feel like dignifying a silly post?

[tblue37]

37. I have been thinking about the man who said, "At long last, have you no shame?"

to Joe McCarthy, and about how perfect that line would be directed at Norm Coleman because of the way he is behaving over having lost to Franken.

But I must admit that every time I see another "Rec this thread" thread, that "At long last, have you no shame?" line always runs through my head.

I just don't understand how people are not embarrassed to behave in such a pathetic, begging, attention-wh*re way out in public.

[Raster]

38. There is always the "hide thread" option. Oh, and "user digression."

[sfam]

39. Here here! I hate them as well. nt

[Laurab]

40. I agree with you 100%

I would love to at least see them off the Greatest page.

[The Doctor.]

41. Most of the time, yes.

Other times, they serve a purpose. Often it is to make a salient point.

Either way, those that start them are not the focus. Therefore, no matter how one might perceive them, their ego is only served in their own minds... if that is their intent.

In reality, all posts in LBN, and "Rec this" type posts aren't about the poster, they're about the subject.

Now, when someone creates an original piece, someone like Plaid Adder or Nance Greggs, the response to their brilliance may very well be ego-serving... but who the fuck cares, they rock.

Get it?

[jgraz]

42. Agree. If you want to get recs, write something worth reading.

I'm not usually in favor of new authoritarian rules, but I checked in yesterday and half the threads on the GP were rec whore posts.

[snot]

43. and the "check in here if you think" threads, too?

[harmonicon]

54. yes!

Oh, god, yes! I have to skip those as well. "Check in here if you'd rather play with a puppy than have your genitals nailed to a board." .... duh... umm... ok. No thanks. I'm already here as a poster because I have a certain set of ideas in common with many other members. I don't need to confirm it. I'd rather discuss something.

[DUlover2909]

44. I kinda agree, they are becoming too common.

I wouldn't say ban them, but I'm getting tired of them.

[99th_Monkey]

45. I TOTALLY agree ... ban this shameless tactic for attention whoring on DU. ~nt~

[UnrepentantLiberal]

46. Can the "I Feel Compelled to Say This"...

followed by more melodrama than three Desperate Housewives episodes watched in one sitting threads be banned as well while you're at it?

[DemBones DemBones]

71. Also the "Must Read!!!" with no clue as to content.

The thread header ought to state what the thread is about.

[meowomon]

47. Let's ban ANY post/thread that starts with "Let's ban..."

Start with this one.

[ExPatLeftist]

48. Not really into banning stuff, but those posts are inane and really pointless. n/t

[bridgit]

49. Agreed, if not the 'rec feature' itself ~

[blondeatlast]

50. I scroll past 'em and never read the the rest. Ban? No, but avoid them, absolutely. nt

[harmonicon]

52. I couldn't agree more!!

That's probably half of the reason that I stay out of some forums completely. I don't even read those threads when I see them on the front page.

[Owl]

56. I agree.

[NNN0LHI]

57. DU already has rules about spamming the board

And that is spamming.

Don

[bobd0]

59. Let's ban these "Let's ban these stupid "Rec if you think..." threads, dammit."

See where this leads?

Maybe we should have a negative rec for all the ban happy censors instead. Then you can voice your opposition without banning others'.

I negative rec this thread.

[Locrian]

60. agreed - it's being abused

The "Rec" is a great function for helping float important / significant issues to the front page. "Kick and Rec this" - is vanity posting.

They remind me of those chain letters saying you will "have bad luck" or whatever if you dont rec the thread. What point do threads like "Kick and Rec if you like Obama" serve????

[bobd0]

61. Disagreed

They aren't like chain letters. No one is threatening you with bad luck if you don't rec their thread. You have the tools to handle this. If you don't like a thread, don't click on it.

The point of threads like, "Kick and Rec if you like Obama" (although I can't remember ever seeing such a thread -- and I just did a search and no such thread showed up in the search results), in my opinion, is to raise a flag, to gauge and solidify support, to piss off lurking freepers, or any number of reasons members can come up with.

But banning and the tacit censorship that follows aren't the solution to your pet peeve.

[Locrian]

72. your right - I read past the "BAN"

While I do maintain they are vanity posts - you're right. There should be no "ban". Just stop posting inane KR requests.

[Pryderi]

62. How about people stop "rec"ing threads for people who beg for recommendations? n/t

[Daemonaquila]

63. *Sings a bar from the Halleluia Chorus*

Yes, please.

[joshdawg]

64. do not "rec" this

But I wholeheartedly agree with Jackpine Radical. This "rec this" is only self-serving to the poster. If people want to "rec" a post, they will without having to accede to the wishes of the poster who is requesting it. So......knock it off with the "rec this if....." already!
Just my opinion. Means nothing to no one except me.

[dccrossman]

65. Rec'ing for the irony

=)

:kick:

[SheilaT]

66. I rarely bother to read

and never recommend threads begging to be recommended. In fact, I think I have once and only once ever clicked on the recommend button. I agree with those who say that begging for K&R is just an ego trip. If something is actually worth reading, offers some kind of good insight, then and only then should it be kicked to the top.

[Time for change]

67. I partly agree with you

I do not hold it against a poster for posting these things -- I make the assumption that they have what they feel is a good reason for posting them.

However, I do agree with you that they tend to diminish the informational value of the "Greatest Page" (especially at the top) because they tend to get an inordinate number of recs compared to the value of the post IMO.

But I don't blame people for recommending them -- Maybe the feeling is that if the poster felt strongly enough about the topic to ask for recommendations, then they want to do something to help out, assuming that they agree with the conclusion.

I think that the best way to handle this, rather than banning, is the use of a negative rec option -- for all posts. If that was done, you might find some posts that currently end up with over 200 recs, having a negative number instead.

[pipi_k]

70. Hmmm....this makes me think of

the "feedback" thing on eBay.

Maybe that would work here too...

Positive, neutral, and negative

or people could give threads a numerical score, from 0 to 5, and only threads with an average of over 3 1/2 get to be on the front page...

[pipi_k]

68. I don't agree with banning them, but...

I do sometimes wonder what is the point...


I guess that's something I'd like to ask the people who post those "Rec this if you think ______" threads. Why?


Many times, I won't even bother reading threads that start out that way, but if I do, I certainly won't rec them even if I agree with them. If I rec a thread, it's because I think it's worthy of being rec'd...not because someone wants an ego trip or something.

But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's not really an ego trip. People who post "Rec this if you think _______" threads....why do you do it? Can you explain?

[stuntcat]

69. yes, Please.

(oh excuse me, I've been accused of internet diarrhea on DU even though I thought I was kinda quiet around here.
Guess I better just stay the Hell away :eyes:)

(no I know what I'll do, I'll start making the "K/R if.. " threads!!!)