Why I think “recommend” “unrecommend” sucks a lot

[Cyrano]

Had the “Washington Post” used a “recommend” “unrecommend” system during Watergate, Richard Nixon might never have been forced to resign.

Tomorrow’s media of influence won’t be the “Washington Post,” “The New York Times,” Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC or any of today’s so-called “mainstream media.” You’re reading tomorrow’s media right now. And you’re reading it every time you link into kos, atrios, digby, Josh Marshall, the Huffington Post, and so many more.

Try not to have a stroke when your grandchildren ask you what a newspaper is. Or what the words “network news” mean.

So what does any of this have to do with “recommend” “unrecommend?” Here’s my answer. Newspapers have editors. And news shows have people who decide what’s important and what isn’t. It was never a “show of hands” system. And that’s something I’m thankful for. Imagine if everyone got to vote about what should appear on page 1, or what story should lead off the nightly news. (Yeah, I know. The “balloon boy” story was not “journalism’s” finest moment.)

So who should decide what should or should not appear on page 1? The publisher and the editors. Skinner is the publisher of DU. And long-term moderators of DU should be the editors who decide what’s important and what’s not. Yeah, it means more work for them. But it sure as hell is a better system than the one in place right now.

We all know that WilliamPitt, kpete, and nancegregg will always end up on page 1 no matter what they write. (And 99% of the time, I have no problem with that, as they contribute such great pieces.)

I’ve never really cared about what made it to page 1 and what didn’t. To me, one (and only one) of the better indicators of what's important and what isn't is the number of people who read an OP. (Sometimes it's only an indication of a good headline. But other times, it's an indicator that it's a topic that many, many people are interested in or concerned about.)

I know there’s a limit to what the DU staff can and can’t do. But I really believe that “recommend” “unrecommend” is not a system that will allow the cream to rise to the top often enough.

Anyhow, that's one person's opinion. Let's hear yours.

[Captain Hilts]

1. It gives folks here yet another means to be petty. nt

[Hepburn]

12. Exactly....

...and they seem to travel in bands.

[damntexdem]

16. Yeah, we love it!

I guess that makes us pettyphiles. ;-)

[Forkboy]

51. *groan*

:rofl:

[The Hope Mobile]

42. So true!! nt

[SIMPLYB1980]

56. Oh my!

:hug:



Replied to wrong post meant for the OP.

[bobbolink]

60. Bullseye. Yet, it's cheered by those who say they decry censorship.

Truly amazing.

[AllentownJake]

2. System is working fine

The article today on Daniel Inouye possibly taking out the Franken Amendment has over 50 recs and is getting plenty of traffic.

[ret5hd]

3. Un-rec'd for whining about unrec

[SammyWinstonJack]

31. +1 nt

[xiamiam]

49. same old same old ..ad nauseum...get rid of unrecommend..its stupid...nt

+1

[Iggo]

4. I had no idea there was some sort of uproar about rec/unrec.

:P

[TexasObserver]

21. I think there was another thread about it the other day ....

[tosh]

5. I want another option.

I want an option that allows me to
a) recommend an OP because I appreciate that it is being brought to our attention
AND
b) unrecommend the news/thought/action that was reported by the OP.

:hide:

[madokie]

6. I guess since I don't much pay any attention to whats on the greatest page

I just rec or un rec as I agree or just simply like or that I don't like what I just read. It's a way for me or for you to let others know how you or I feel, anonymously mind you as it should be, about this particular thread, nothing more or nothing less. It matters not to you or to anyone else for that matter how I might rec or unrec. Once you figure that out you'll feel much better about your time here.

sometimes I type rec sometimes its a +1 but this time it's a -1 and it has nothing to do with you personally. Learn to separate yourself from what you post, for crying out loud :-) whiny butt :rofl:

[Cyrano]

11. So having an opinion is whining? Strange new world.

[madokie]

22. whining about the rec un-rec is

and thats what I'm talking about

[scubadude]

7. What I want to know is why do they show it as

Why not show the count as a negative number? Why not show the honest count?

Scuba

[Echo In Light]

9. Transparency is apparently not conducive to agenda

[peace13]

14. Love to see how many UR's are on this one alone.

I know my R went right in the crapper!

[madokie]

37. go here and maybe watch and see what it turns out to be.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=greatest_threads&topten=1

[peace13]

38. Thanks for that.

I didn't realize that function was available.

[peace13]

8. I hear what you are saying!

The least that could be done is that both UR and R tallies show. I don't like it and never have. My donations show my contempt for the system!

[KatyMan]

10. Bullshit.

Had the “Washington Post” used a “recommend” “unrecommend” system during Watergate, Richard Nixon might never have been forced to resign.

Your post is in negative recs, and I was still able to read it. How have you been 'silenced' or 'martyred' or 'victimized' by the fact that a bunch of people unrecced a dumbass vanity thread?

[Cyrano]

13. So my question to you Katyman is this. WTF are you talking about?

[KatyMan]

35. Please. You know what I meant

Unrec doesn't mean your thread disappears. I used this thread as an example: it has negative recs, yet people are still reading and responding to it. So what are you complaining about?
Perhaps the people you mentioned get on 'Page 1' because they post interesting threads? Personally, I wouldn't know, because I never look at those pages, like many many DUers.
It's about you complaining that your pride or vanity were wounded because you got unrecs. Who gives a shit?
What thread did you post that was equal to Watergate that got unrecced?

[gkhouston]

15. When will the unrec thread vaccine be available? n/t

[Echo In Light]

18. Quick!...get POLANSKI on the phone immediately!

[SidDithers]

17. Unrecc'd for whining about unrec...

Sid

[TexasObserver]

19. FAIL. I stopped reading when you mentioned Watergate in the 1st sentence.

Unrecommended.

[Vickers]

20. 'I really believe that “recommend” “unrecommend” is not a system that will...'

'...allow the cream to rise to the top'

I *completely* disagree.

I never used to read the Greatest Page, mainly because it was full of vanity crap and bullshit that appealed to the least common denominator.

Now crap like this whiny-ass thread (which I happily Unrec'ed, so much for anonymity!) doesn't make it there.

:thumbsup:

Go look at the Greatest Page right now and tell me that ain't the cream of this site.

[Cyrano]

23. It's possible to disagree without using phrases like "... this whiny-ass thread."

[Vickers]

25. OK. let me rephrase:

"Now crap like this super-dee-dooper whiny-ass thread (which I happily Unrec'ed, so much for anonymity!) doesn't make it there."

:eyes:

Toughen up, buttercup.

[Echo In Light]

28. I agree. It's only b/c those who love the unrec feature tend to be name-callers to begin with

... I mean, it's rather obvious. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule of course, but generally it's not exactly difficult to browse over user's posts, and going by the language and tone they choose to engage others in, accurately determine whether or not they think the unrec feature is a good option or not.

The more belligerent and prone to name-calling they are, the more likely they LOVE the unrec feature ... or, possibly, at a minimum, maybe aren't crazy about it as much as they see it as a vehicle they can use - especially since the hate-rallying of unrec themed threads has been more or less deemed acceptable at DU - to do what they enjoy doing; mocking and name-calling. The so-called concern over the Greatest Page content is merely cover.

[Codeine]

24. Stop worrying about the Greatest Page.

It's fucking meaningless. If people are talking about it it will be on the page it was posted, be that GD or LBN or whatthefuckever. Just because the Cool Kids don't have their vanity page baloney to reinforce how special they are doesn't mean DU is broken.

[TexasObserver]

26. "Just because the Cool Kids don't have their vanity page baloney ...

... to reinforce how special they are doesn't mean DU is broken."


So true!

It's ALL about the righteous indignation of not getting that cookie any more.

Where's my goddamn cookie?!

[LostInAnomie]

47. +1

One of the best responses I've seen on this subject. A lot of fragile egos aren't getting the stroking they were used to so they keep whining.

[pipi_k]

27. So putting the decision in the hands of the few instead of the many...

That's sort of like telling us all that we're too damned:

stupid/nasty/petty/dishonest/fill in the blank

to be trusted with something this huge.

Not that I wouldn't trust the Admins and long term mods to decide, but geez...thanks a bunch for the vote of confidence

[Occam Bandage]

29. "People are too dumb to be entrusted with their own opinions."

[cbdo2007]

30. Why does anyone even pay attention to Rec or Unrec?

I come to DU and click on Forums and click on General Discussion.

There's a big ass list of 100 topics down the page.

I read through the items and click on the ones that look interesting.

Seriously, I never even once look over at Rec/Unrec to see if people like it or not. Who cares?

[Echo In Light]

34. On its surface, it means zero. The heart of the matter hasn't anything to do w/either recs or unrecs

... but rather, it speaks to a sharp ideological/personality type divide amongst Duers - much like, say, the Dungeon forum.

[A HERETIC I AM]

32. These threads are so much fun.

Unrecc'd with glee.

[NoPasaran]

33. In my opinion, the first person to eat cauliflower must have been pretty damn hungry

[quiet.american]

36. ???? lol :) nt

[Thickasabrick]

39. This thread is almost at the the top of "NEW AND HOT" see - it

does work after all.

[SoCalDem]

40. Amen.. I never even go to Greatest, Home or the new one

Latest?..

and it's pretty obvious how the whole thing works, when a post appears, and instantly gets an "un-rec" when there is NO way possible that the un-rec-er could have read more than the title & the poster's name.

A quick editorial cruise of the "important" pages (by the admins) would work as well.. Just move the crappy stuff off those precious pages, if it's bothersome.

If there has to be a "scoring method", why not 1-5..with no choice for zero..

If you don't like a post or a poster..just don't click the damned thing in the first place, or hey here's a thought..comment..and move on..

Is it really necessary to say... "I don't like this or I don't like you" by pushing the secret button?

I hate cottage cheese & beets, but I don't leave angry post-its above them on the sneeze guard..I just pass them by...

[Atticus]

53. He-e-ey-----wait a minute! Is that common sense you're using?

Is that allowed here?

Admins----over here, please!

[Zomby Woof]

41. On Halloween

The horse you beat to death will rise from the grave and poop on your threads.

[LostInAnomie]

43. Who honestly gives a fuck about what makes it on the greatest page?

DU is a discussion board, not a popularity contest. Unrec obviously doesn't keep people from discussing topics. Posts whining about unrec get unrecced more than anything, and just look at how many responses they get.

[petronius]

46. That's kind of what I ws wondering - personally, I don't look at that column

or the greatest page. Why use a filter when I can pick from the entire list of active topics?

Perhaps we need a Rec/Unrec forum, where the people who care about the feature can slug it out in peace... :shrug:

[TexasObserver]

54. It's there for those who care to look at that column.

It's only meaningful to those who look at it as some kind of barometer of acceptance.

Some people think the voting on recommends or unrecommends either validates them or doesn't validate them.

[Stinky The Clown]

44. I predict the usual cadre of six or so very unpleasant DU moralizers will be in this thread ......

Telling you why you're wrong.

Not why they might **think** you're wrong. Oh no. They're absolutists and they will say why you *are* wrong.

BTW, I agree with your premise.





On edit ..... too late ..... they've already swarmed.

[redqueen]

45. But simply unrec'ing doesn't make it go away.

So... I don't see how it's such a big deal.

[PeaceNikki]

48. Ha!! Watergate!!

I think you take yourself and DU a bit too seriously. I couldn't get past that sentence but that was all I needed to read.

[Robb]

50. It is impossible to take DU too seriously.

:patriot:

[TexasObserver]

52. It's like Watergate, and Teapot Dome, and Vicuna coat, and Abram Jackoff!

All rolled into one nasty DU feature.

The horror.

The horror.

[myrna minx]

55. Dewey Defeats Truman!!

Could you imagine if DU existed back then, we'd have 24 hours of THAT headline on the appearing on the greatest page (without un-rec). :rofl:

[TexasObserver]

63. Truman favors Unrecommend!!

It's a thumbs up or thumbs down vote. One would not think that would be a big deal.

[PeaceNikki]

57. Abram Jackoff

heh. and lolz, verily.

[TexasObserver]

58. I've heard that's what people called him when he was growing up.

[Nye Bevan]

59. If a DUer uncovered something like Watergate

he or she would get a lot of recs. I remember a few years ago a DUer, I forget who, took it upon himself to look into whether Bush had actually earned the medals he wore. So much so that other news outlets picked up his story. This kind of stuff gets recommended to the hilt here.

[bobbolink]

61. There is one thing you said that I will disagree with.

"I’ve never really cared about what made it to page 1 and what didn’t."

If you have ever lived with minority status, you WOULD care if your own issue never made it to any broad attention.

Some of us know that isolation first hand.

[DefenseLawyer]

62. Can't we create a special forum for paranoids and shut-ins that obsess about rec/unrec?

Please excuse me while I jump out the window now.

[cherokeeprogressive]

64. I wish Unrecs could make a thread disappear.

Not really. If that were the case, none of my threads would ever see the light of monitors.