Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Queen of Love

Show user on emoticon of topic

Recommended Posts

To clarify: QoL probably means "ratings under posts should include lists of who rated what". Then again, I'm not fluent in QoL-ese (nor do I want to be).


My take:

For several years I've been a member of Facepunch forums, where such a rating system exists - though it's far more open than what we have here. While the G1 forums have 6 ratings, most of which are dedicated to positive reactions, Facepunch gives you a far wider scope of reactions - we have post ratings such as Agree, Funny, Winner, Cute, Friendly, Sympathy (showing compassion), Informative, Good Idea... but also more critical ratings such as Dumb, ["Rude Person" (thanks, forum filter!)], Bad Reading, Baby, or Snowflake.

(A similar system exists on Knockout Community Forums, an offshoot forum where FP users and moderators are planning to move if/when the owner of Facepunch decides to shut it down, which he has hinted at in the past.)


The idea behind this system is to allow feedback to posts without requiring users to write more posts which would not contribute anything substantial to the discussion beyond "I agree!" or "I disagree"; posting such messages would also move threads closer to the post limit (after which the thread is automatically locked).

The caveat is obviously the fact that you have to own up to your opinion, as clicking on a post's ratings also shows a public list of users next to the ratings they assigned.

On that note though, FP and KOC make a point of drilling the following mindset into its users: stop caring about ratings. Not everyone is going to agree with you - and that's okay.


I like the rating system. I find it intuitive for gauging other people's opinions and finding out what individual users are like towards opposing ideas... but I'm not sure if I would like to see the same system here.


FP/KOC's rating system works partially due to how it is moderated, not just by the moderators but also the community itself. Caring about ratings (including, but not limited to, editing your post to complain about negative ratings) is frowned upon - but so is spamming insulting/negative ratings under every post in the thread. I can't imagine the same thing holding true here - and asking LO to moderate ratings would only mean more unnecessary work they'd have to do on the side.

In terms of general attitudes and maturity, APB's community is practically at high school level. We're all very cliquey and will generally flock to any reason at all to flex on others and show our superiority. Case in point: in the last thread where I participated, another user tried to invalidate my opinion by publicly assuming that I'm new to the game and/or silver-ranked, thus I should shut up. Obviously the user was wrong on both counts, but it still serves as a display of how we treat each other in this community. Now imagine this extending to people automatically giving negative ratings to posts not for their content, but for who wrote them.

The topic is also complicated by the fact that we have a public score display under our avatars, showing the amount of positive ratings we've accumulated in total. I understand that one of its purposes is to reward users who submit thought-out, positively rated, and agreeable posts - but at the same time it "gamifies" posting (encouraging quick and witty one-liner responses at the beginning of a thread) and can discourage actual discussion (something like "this guy's saying something that the high-rated guy is disagreeing with. why should I listen to him?").


To summarize:

TL;DR: I don't know if that's a good idea. I personally don't think it could be introduced to the forums - not with what this community is usually like.


Edited by MartinPL
One of the FP ratings I brought up as an example got filtered to something different.
  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Warframe forum there is not a limit to emote-vote, and this allow better to autodetect who spam downvotes/upvotes.

Daily Limit should be removed .


I dont care about vote moderation ,(useless), but the segret vote is like the Internet of 1995 where every user of every single chat room was total anonymus, the heaven of haters.

I would see not who constant use their 2 neurons for downvote me as sport, but for see the opposite, who rarely emote-vote (up/down/lol) and care about interesting user opinion vote.


Fast example: a suggestion is largely downvoted by veterans = consider suggestion as wrong or bad planed. 

Supersonic example : upvoted the most stupid thing i ever posted = maybe the idea is not so stupid. 

Quantic ex: <+n/-n>= { QoL}+  

FTL ex: - ❤️ -  Ty </name> 



TLDR:  i upvoted ur analysis 😄 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


11 hours ago, Queen of Love said:

Daily Limit should be removed .

That's possible

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to have a fanbase to pleasure my epeen.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...