Do you use it?

Do you like it?

I don't, and I don't.

I think it robs some discussions of a bit of civility, makes things combative, and so on.

I like it, use it when appropriate to mark up or down posts. It helps to highlight high/low points of a thread. But I keep running into a limit that I can use per day + or -.

I like it, it lets you sort the thread from highest ranked to lowest, so you can skip the nonsensical posts if you don't feel like filtering through them. Especially handy in the Politics section.

i only ever use the plus, and that's only rarely.

I'm with Loki.

I'll use it every now and then, but I think its a redundant feature. I can just as easilly ignore a post or combat it with a response, if need be.

No and no.

I've never used it and I couldn't care less about it. It's just another method of encouraging homogeny and mediocrity.

i.e. Don't say anything 'out of line' or weird, because people might not read your post.

Idiots have always posted drivel on here, now the posts just have a red box in the corner. It does seem that a few people get off on -1s, which would explain why certain people make the same post over and over until theory posts ate no longer worth reading because they're always the same

I don't like it. It's a way for immature cowards to hit and run with no consequence. This is a DISCUSSION forum.

I don't like it. It's a way for immature cowards to hit and run with no consequence. This is a DISCUSSION forum.

No it isn't. Have you not been paying attention the last couple of years? It's a haven for people to bitch and moan about how not every car is a hardtop, or that every car isn't a coupe, or that every car isn't a Hyundai Sonata Turbo, or that Greenpeace is coming out at night and taking away trucks or some other such nonsense. That's not discussion, its whining.

Well, it would seem that my point is bolstered by this very thread.

Everybody above me gets a free +1

^ Yer roon'n it !!

Go find the Cadillac ULC thread and you'll see why its worthwhile. The posts that actually discuss the car are the ones with 0's while the worthless repetitive crap has -1s and the arguments against the repetitive crap have +1s.

Also, the mobile site doesn't display the ratings, so its kinda fun to try and guess how many negatives a post has. I imagine that by this evening this one will be -2.

^ actually, in the 'LA show / ULC' thread, you posted this repetitive crap:

Unless its a Cadillac Hyundai Sonata turbo, it'll be a hideous failure.

And you have a +3, so your theory is shot.

Probably 3 people capable of understanding satire

I use it when I think that someone is making a very good point, or being an idiot. I don't care whether or not I agree with the person, my personal ratings have more to do with whether the person is making C+G a better or worse place with that particular post.

Thankfully, the ratings system no longer has to do with individual reputation, like it first did. If that were still the case, I think we would have done away with the entire system by now.

Satty is right about one thing for the most part: there is a lot of complaining that detracts from any intelligent discussion that takes place around here. Intelligent and high quality discussions are part of this site's main M.O. and when all threads are high in good content, there is a chance we can attract new regulars.

When we're all sitting around bashing a new car because it doesn't get the gas mileage of a frigging Sonata and because it doesn't have windows for the a, b, and c pillars that roll down, threads begin to look immature as does the entire community.

I can see a way to reform the idea: merge the report and ratings system into one tidy clusterfuck. Posts below a threshold of minus five are earmarked for deletion. When a member ranks a post down in this fashion, they have to leave a small note saying why they ranked the post down. Anyone who leaves a reason saying, in essence, that they're butthurt that such-and-such doesn't agree that the Cadillac ULC is a POS automatically makes their vote invalid.

I'd just as soon toss it as excess baggage.

camino, i agree and i pretty much ignore it. i do post up or down sometimes. but as mentioned above....those casting stones about certain posts are just as guilty posting useless divisive 'satirical' drivel as others.

some people take the post rating system way too seriously.

I'm pretty sure the rating system does nothing but distill a common mindset.

Then again, the same group that ruined pretty much all discussion here has pretty much targeted and eliminated participation by all of the unique posters. (Balthazar and Camino have managed to somehow hang on, but that's about it)

Im gonna be honest; I rarely visit any forum here besides the Lounge because it's just not worth my time to read posts by people who can't seem to progress past the 'YouTube mook' phase of internet maturity.

FOG, the whole point of C&G is to come here and argue about the things we love the most. The whole point is to disagree.

How interesting would C&G be if every post was "THE CAMARO ROXZORS@!!11!"

+1

+1

+1

+1

FOG, the whole point of C&G is to come here and argue about the things we love the most. The whole point is to disagree.

How interesting would C&G be if every post was "THE CAMARO ROXZORS@!!11!"

+1

+1

+1

+1

- 1

The ratings system engenders a negative and combative tone that detracts from the site in my opinion.

I believe that C&G is here for discussion and debate, not argument and animosity.

Obviously, some think otherwise.

Will it impact the way I conduct myself here? No, not really, but I do see it as a net minus for the site. Taking issue with another poster's position or words can certainly be a positive and beneficial contibution to the discourse here. But only if done a some measure of clarity and skill... and courtesy. The point system is a cudgel where a scalpel is required.

Such a system is both crutch and weapon when employed by the immature and those given to a tribe mentality.

the net has stooped the entire population to new lows. Sites like 'am i hot or not' where you rate naked bodies or something of that ilk.

Don't get me wrong, that is fun....... but it's very LCD (lowest common denominator).

the net has stooped the entire population to new lows. Sites like 'am i hot or not' where you rate naked bodies or something of that ilk.

Don't get me wrong, that is fun....... but it's very LCD (lowest common denominator).

Exactly my point - we should try to be better than that.

Wow must be a good day if you have to resort to the post rating system to get your bitch on...

That's a sloppy characterization, Croc. And it certainly embodies the sort of uncivil conduct I'm talking about.

I see the post rating system as nothing more than clapping or jeering during a debate.

Who said I can't rate a post AND respond?

Nothing is to say that you won't do both.

However, the value of clapping and jeering during a debate is dubious at best.

Most often, it is used in a nasty and mean-spirited fashion - and it has no upside.

Seriously...see Olds' post way up there: TAKING THIS WAY TOO SERIOUSLY

Edited December 10, 201015 yr by Croc

Well, it was a serious discussion from the start - as intended.

I have yet to see a defense of this system that indicates an upside.

I think I have enumerated the strikes against it, and determined that I am not alone in my thinking.

But, by all means, counter the argument if you can. But serious I intend to remain in this thread.

Nothing is to say that you won't do both.

However, the value of clapping and jeering during a debate is dubious at best.

Most often, it is used in a nasty and mean-spirited fashion - and it has no upside.

Can it be mean spirited? sure. Is it always? no... not even sometimes.

For instance: You have 3 times as much positive rating as you do negative rating..... it would have been an even bigger multiplier if one person in particular hadn't gone hog wild with the -1s on you today.

However, the only ratings you've given out (2): have both been negative.

Can it be mean spirited? sure. Is it always? no... not even sometimes.

For instance: You have 3 times as much positive rating as you do negative rating..... it would have been an even bigger multiplier if one person in particular hadn't gone hog wild with the -1s on you today.

However, the only ratings you've given out (2): have both been negative.

Correct on my usage count - and I regret using it. Much as is usually done, I did it without thought.

I shouldn't have done that, and later realized that it was a mistake. Therefore my policy has been not to use it at all.

I have to ask again: where is the value in this?

The only positive value I personally see in it is, I can +1 a post I agree with (for various reasons) instead of adding a whole post that basically sez '+1'. Bandwidth saver & keeps the thread tidy.

Other than that, it could go away immediately & I wouldn't miss it at all.

Correct on my usage count - and I regret using it. Much as is usually done, I did it without thought.

I shouldn't have done that, and later realized that it was a mistake. Therefore my policy has been not to use it at all.

I have to ask again: where is the value in this?

Because we don't need a post that says "+1"

Pretty weak sauce,that,

But I'll give you the credit for finding one small positive ( though I'd rather see an actual post).

WHY does it need to be defended? You don't like it--so don't use it. Simple as that.

Yes, you aren't alone in your thinking, but you are only joined by a handful of others. Most people don't care about it one way or another, and my anecdotal observation seems to show it is generally POSITIVE feedback that is meted rather than negative.

Now, let's see the positives of the feedback: Positive saves an endless stream of "+1" or "I agree completely" posts after a particularly good post, and the negative saves on "I completely disagree you idiot" type posts, which often escalate into flames.

By nature, this is a democratic, social medium, so that the post ratings are reflective of a popularity contest is no different than the posters or posts: see smk. Honestly? I don't buy this stifling of viewpoints argument at all. Have some strength of conviction and, yet again, DON'T TAKE THE INTERNET SO SERIOUSLY. If a few posts here and there with -2s and -3s or even a -12 (as I saw on one of smk's posts once) are what makes you, a grown-ass man, want to pick up your proverbial ball and go home because your viewpoints weren't agreed upon by everyone here, big effing deal. Hell, I'd have been gone a loooooooooooooooooooong time ago if I took this site so personally.

Don't be such a fool, Croc.

This isn't some whinefest - it is simply something I feel strongly about.

Your own participation in this thread indicates that you give the issue some merit as well.

It certainly isn't about me and whatever ratings I may get. It's about the inhospitable environment this system helps to create and its detrimental effect on C&G.

We've all seen members savaged by this, just for expressing an opinion.

Discouraging people from posting their thoughts is the polar opposite of this site's purpose.

Edited December 11, 201015 yr by Camino LS6

Don't be such a fool, Croc.

Name-calling isn't exactly high-level discourse, now is it?

This isn't some whinefest - it is simply something I feel strongly about.

Your own participation in this thread indicates that you give the issue some merit as well.

I think this is actually a pretty ridiculous thread, to be honest. I've yet to see any evidence of a problem this is causing. Again, I think this must just be a slow day or something.

It certainly isn't about me and whatever ratings I may get. It's about the inhospitable environment this system helps to create and its detrimental effect on C&G.

What inhospitable environment? What detrimental effect? I've seen no evidence of such.

We've all seen members savaged by this, just for expressing an opinion.

"Savaged"? By a little (usually green and positive) number in the lower right-hand corner of their post? Why stop the hyperbole there? Let's call this what it really is: systematic disenfranchisement of a vulnerable minority population at the hands of the public at large! Quick, where's the ACLU hotline number??

Discouraging people from posting their thoughts is the polar opposite of this site's purpose.

...by up- or down-rating a post? Really? OMG someone disagreed with me...now I'm only gonna post at GM Source!!

Lighten up...it's the internet. And I can't say I hold much regard for anyone who's so thin-skinned that they got upset over a down-rated post. My unpopular, but reasoned, opinions get down-rated all the time, and I just laugh it off as someone without the intellect to actually debate me on my views...assuming I even notice/care in the first place.

You're still not getting it.

But no matter, your opinion is duly noted.

And I stand in opposition to it.

Edited December 11, 201015 yr by Camino LS6

Would you prefer it if we responded to posts we disagree with by telling the poster that we hope they get aids and cancer and a yeast infection then die in a fire after being attacked by wolves, hoping the offending poster realizes these aren't legit hopes, merely a severe exaggeration of the displeasure their post brought?

That could be entertaining.

...but I'd prefer to simply do away with the system.

I guess that's enough discussion, maybe it's time for a poll.

As everyone in this thread very well knows, it doesn't take a post rating system to drive away membership.

The kind of bickering in this thread however.... quite effective.

A poll is unnecessary.

I respectfully disagree.

I'm pretty sure the rating system does nothing but distill a common mindset.

Then again, the same group that ruined pretty much all discussion here has pretty much targeted and eliminated participation by all of the unique posters. (Balthazar and Camino have managed to somehow hang on, but that's about it)

Im gonna be honest; I rarely visit any forum here besides the Lounge because it's just not worth my time to read posts by people who can't seem to progress past the 'YouTube mook' phase of internet maturity.

Odd, because I recall certain 'unique' individuals expressing considerably vitriolic opinions towards other individuals who were real assets to this place. You know, when one unique individual made a topic about the V8's demise, and a few other 'unique' members decided to lambaste the poster.

There's no 'group' at C&G out to silence opposing viewpoints. Instead, perhaps you're just noticing people beginning to get sick and tired of hearing people complain about:

Pontiac

Small Cars

Government Motors

New cars versus Old cars

Technology in vehicles

RWD vs FWD

Society supposedly being in the sh*tter

Hyundai Sonata Turbo

Cadillac needing a 100K car, but should not have a 35K crossover in order to pay for that 100K car's development

Buick

The worst thing of all is how people have just decided to regurgitate their arguments in different threads. It gets really old, really fast. And that's why there's been an increased 'fight' from the people you believe are somehow out to eliminate participation. Participation isn't being eliminated; it's just that those 'unique' individuals are being taken to task, and they've got no real recourse.

I hope you don't get aids and cancer and a yeast infection then die in a fire after being attacked by wolves.

See, my method can also be used in place of a +1