omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-12-10 10:03 PM
Original message |
The difference b/w Un/Rec total = Less than Zero and Un/Rec total = Zero |
|
Edited on Fri Mar-12-10 10:05 PM by omega minimo
"<" is a chute that opens and all Recs go tumbling down it. No one knows what the actual tally is.
"0" is a hole that opens and all Recs go tumbling down it. No one knows what the actual tally is.
|
The Velveteen Ocelot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-12-10 10:04 PM
Response to Original message |
1. But who cares? Really? |
peace13
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-12-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. then why have it at all |
The Velveteen Ocelot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-12-10 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
I don't think it's a very useful feature; it just starts dumb arguments.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-12-10 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. It's funny to see who cares about it. |
|
:spray: It gives them POWER!!!!
|
SoCalDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
12. Exactly.. things were better before we had EITHER |
|
participation in the thread kept it alive..not just "K & R" or ""K & UNrec"..
the unrec feature just brought out the snipers, thread-nannies & score-keepers.
the "r" is not necessary either, if people just participate in the thread by adding to it...
a drive-by r or un r does not replace discussion..
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-12-10 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. The people who think others care that they use it as a weapon |
|
and think those others are the petty and "bullies" :crazy:
You're right. It's pretty pointless.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 03:15 PM
Response to Original message |
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 03:16 PM
Response to Original message |
7. aside from you, who gives a flying rat turd? |
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-13-10 03:21 PM by omega minimo
:rofl: the petty feel empowered, so the difference makes a difference to them.
|
Mari333
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 03:19 PM
Response to Original message |
8. omg its like a black hole |
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
10. where the numbers run backwards.............. |
Mari333
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
20. sooo every unrec you get is a rec in an alternate universe!! |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-13-10 04:47 PM by Mari333
yayyyyyyyy (ignore the grouchy people on here)
|
SoCalDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
13. oooh. thnaks Mari.. got me a new desktop pic |
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:02 PM
Response to Original message |
11. There's another difference |
|
I just unrecc'd this thread. I unrecc'd it because it is basically a whine against unrec, which I happen to think is a very useful feature since it mostly keeps the rec-this-thread-if-you-think-this-minority-group-sucks threads off the greatest page. I routinely unrecommend threads whining about it. You wouldn't have known I unrecc'd this thread except for my announcement here - and that is the big and useful difference.
The whining about "why on earth would someone unrecommmend my beautiful, well, thought out, socially worthy post" that has been starting recently before the first substantive post in a thread will, largely, disappear - because the whiners will never know whether that 0 is really zero, or includes one or more hidden unrecs. Hence, whining about something that may or may not actually be true would subject the whiner to ridicule - and I doubt that anyone so concerned about not being liked would willingly subject themselves to ridicule.
|
CTyankee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
14. Aw, I'm sorry you're whining about losing Un rec counts! |
|
But you have whole bunch of other whiners so you can organize a great big PITY PARTY!!! Look on the bright side!!!
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
19. That was the most articulate whining on this I've seen -- EVAH!!! |
CTyankee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
22. There, there. Don't worry...you'll live. |
|
You'll just have to buckle down and read the thread's posts...but, here's the silver lining: you may learn something! Think of that!!
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
24. Your reply is either misplaced or makes no sense whatsoEVAH |
CTyankee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
27. Well I am so sorry...nt |
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
25. meaning the previous post you replied to. mebbe that's why your confused.... |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-13-10 06:46 PM by omega minimo
:shrug:
|
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
I don't think you understood my post.
I don't care what the unrec count is - I'm just glad that no longer showing a negative count seems to have stopped the first post in a thread being someone whining about someone who dared unrec a "worthy" post. (i.e. losing a <0 count appears to be a good thing.)
|
Bluebear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
16. Could you fit the word "whining" into your post a few more times? |
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
30. I'm sure I could, if you really want me to. |
|
If it hadn't been going on, I wouldn't have felt the need to call it by name, and I really don't know any other appropriate word to describe the actions of someone who watches a thread for what seems to be the sole purpose of noting whe the post count goes below zero in order to make the first substantive response in the thread a comment along the lines of "who dared unrec this worthy thread."
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
18. No it's not. I don't care. I think it's funny that the people who care, care about something |
|
that was petty and arbitrary in the first place, maintain their illusion that others are the problem, the "bullies' etc.
Pretty pathetic :rofl: and funny
The only people who care at all about UnRec and post about it anymore are the same ones with the same petty complaints and control issues you are so eloquently articulating.
So the joke is -- NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THE ACTUAL TALLY IS. And the control freaks want to obsess over Zero vs. Less Than. You've made a lucid case for another logic, but it still doesn't make sense. Folks know that the Zero means +X and -X = 0, one way or another.
A sane adult solution is to not care; to accept it as arbitrary, some mystery that will have occasional tweaks to keep the Power Button people engaged, but ultimately be only under the control of those who open the Rec chute/Black Hole and decide what floats to the top.
:spray:
|
CTyankee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
23. Here's a little secret: I don't care either. |
|
I never either Rec or Unrec. and I don't give a damn about the Greatest whatits. I read. I learn. It suits me to think for myself...
|
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
29. The obligatory "who unrecc'd my post" |
|
being the first post in a thread has pretty much vanished since they went to 0 being the lowest count.
"rec-this-if-you-think-X-minority-sucks" posts no longer make it on the front page - there are enough unrecs to counter that kind of mean-spirited and unworthy thread so it typically has a 0 or lower count
As far as not knowing what the tally is - I never cared what the tally was. I wanted the mean-spirited threads designed to attack a group of people, or to put down their concerns off the front page. They are not worthy of being considered the best of DU. Unrec pretty much fixed that problem.
Unfortunately, the instantaneous appearance of a <0 led to the "how dare someone unrec my thread" being the first post in somewhere around 1/3 of the threads in GD. Not showing vote totals less than zero seems to have fixed that annoyance (it didn't really rise to the level of a problem). That is a difference - and that was my only point. There is real difference at in impact on the discourse in a thread between having zero as a count, and having <0 show up early in the life of a thread.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-13-10 08:29 PM by omega minimo
the whole mess is a solution to a problem that never existed, except in the minds of people who often seem as petty as what they claim to be so disturbed by.
And IMHO the honor of positive Rec concept was devalued by the introduction of a lot of mind games and power trips that apparently already existed and needed an outlet.
The UnRec button is that outlet. And whether it's 0 or <0, no one knows how many or where the "votes" go ...... it's completely arbitrary.
And funny.
:hi:
|
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
36. You must not be a member of any group |
|
that was regularly targeted on the front page of DU with a "rec this thread if you think XXX should STFU" (XXX being typically gays, trans, ethnic minorities, or some other group that had had the audacity to express the desire for equal rights - or simply to have their concerns heard).
As a lesbian, it was very disheartening to repeatedly be greeted when I entered DU with several of the top threads being the equivalent of one of the above, day after day. Unrecs have put an end to that.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
37. I'm a member and associate of many groups |
|
marginalized on DU, including women, feminist, health, spiritual and African American, most of whom have stood down -- or left -- long ago. I didn't observe the Greatest Page wars. I know there were a lot of sharp elbows being thrown and a lot of people alienating potential allies with their attitudes. Maybe someone did want them to STFU. :shrug:
The groups and topics that are marginalized tend to have much in common and be vitally connected to solving our universal problems. Wonder if that awareness has increased with the changes to the Greatest Page.
|
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
40. I really don't care what ends up on the Greatest Page |
|
I don't think it is visited that much - I never go there,and I don't think which threads are featured there makes a bit of difference as to the awareness within DU of the voices of marginalized individuals. The quantity or quality of discussion is not impacted (or at most very marginally impacted) by whether or not it makes the Greatest Page. If a thread generates discussion (i.e. posts, not recs), it continues to stay on the front page of the forum the user posted it in. If there is little interest, it will drop back to later pages and probably fade away.
I do think slapping already marginalized visitors in the face with two or three threads requesting thread recommendations if you want gays to STFU about marriage, or DADT, etc. - day after day on the home page of democraticunderground.com tends to discourage visitors who are the target of such threads from making repeat visits. (If you don't understand what I'm talking about, enter DU from the URL above - in the center of the page you will find the top 5 threads on the Greatest Page - prior to implementation of unrecs there were days when 3 of the 5 were slam threads. Now they are almost always either substantive threads or supporting a member (or positive political figure) facing hard times. I can't even remember the last time I saw a "rec this" slam thread.)
Regardless of whether you agree with the particular sentiment, threads which were created solely to slam already marginalized groups are not the best of DU, and should not be our face to the world (i.e. featured on the DU homepage).
There may have been other ways to deal with the problem that permitting only "yes" votes and then featuring the top vote getting threads on the DU home page created, but the solution that was implemented (permitting "no" votes) did solve the problem. I wouldn't have had an objection to some other solution - but the one that was implemented worked and the DU homepage is certainly more inviting than it was before unrecs were implemented.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
43. Some groups are more equal than others |
Ms. Toad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #43 |
44. However equal they are, the home page of DU |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-13-10 11:13 PM by Ms. Toad
shouldn't be a place where popular vote is permitted to be used to slam any group. Without unrecs, that is how recs were being used - and those slammed were unable to do anything about it.
As I said, the solution Skinner et. al imposed wasn't the only possible solution to a real problem, but it was the one they chose and it resolved the problem.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-14-10 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #44 |
46. Are you saying this Greatest Page brouhaha was about one group? |
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-14-10 04:33 AM
Response to Reply #46 |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
LoZoccolo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
45. Then you just wait until there is one rec and then step on it. n/t |
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-14-10 03:54 AM
Response to Reply #45 |
47. Another misplaced post? |
Fumesucker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:21 PM
Response to Original message |
|
There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call "The Unrec Zone".
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
pipi_k
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
26. Didn't there used to be another similar show |
|
called "The Pouter Limits"?
|
Fumesucker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
28. Yes, and there was also Science Friction Theater . n/t |
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
34. More recently there was |
hay rick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
RexS
(36 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 04:26 PM
Response to Original message |
17. I can predict that this post will never be at +1 rec |
Greyhound
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 08:29 PM
Response to Original message |
33. I agree, who cares? But then I still don't see what the function achieves other than a negative |
|
outlet that encourages bad behavior.
|
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
|
it's very bad to make fun of it :evilgrin:
|
SidDithers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 10:15 PM
Response to Original message |
38. Error: you can only Unrecommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours...nt |
omega minimo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
Jeff In Milwaukee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-13-10 10:50 PM
Response to Original message |
42. I was told there would be no math on this thread(nt) |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 04:47 AM
Response to Original message |