New ratings (important & you tried)

arent the reason we have MOST rules because of "thin-skinned people" that throw "hissy fits?" Either way, I think we have strayed from whether these would be a good addition or if ratings in general are a good thing. In the long run, these are redundant clutter.

 

I don't think so. Speaking only about harassment, there's a major difference in being personally attacked and in receiving a negative / passive aggressive rating.

I don't think this thread is straying at all. I haven't scrolled all the way back, but Zikeji and I are both responding to Opalium's reasons for not being a fan of this suggestion. One rating isn't clutter-y enough to be an issue for me ( I don't really like the important rating personally ), but Opal isn't making the clutter argument or feasibility argument. He's saying that it would promote a negative environment on the forums, which isn't a great argument in my mind.

 

Ratings are beneficial in that they allow an opinion to be conveyed without cluttering up a thread (save for suggestion threads where we still all "+1" instead of "Agree"). They're essentially a miniature poll.

Some people take them seriously (on both ends of the spectrum), and this has led to problems in the past.

I don't agree with the argument that "Important" and "Informative" are the same. A post about an upcoming event that isn't SGM related could be rated informative, whereas a post / reminder about an SGM event / activity might warrant an "important" rating. This being said, there is no guarantee it'll be used that way and anything important enough gets stickied / highlighted somehow anyway most of the time.


However, I do think an argument can be made for the "You Tried" ratings.


For one, "You Tried" would be a neutral rating that, while it could be passive aggressive, more people might be inclined to utilize as compared to "dumb". For example, if someone makes an objectively dumb suggestion, normally people just rate it "dumb" and move on. However, the OP might be new, might be young, etc. - there are alot of reasons people might make a suggestion we consider dumb. If we were to rate it "You Tried", we (hopefully) wouldn't be reinforcing potentially negative emotions.

Not to mention "You Tried" gives us flexibility. If a new user does something dumb, we might be able to rate "You Tried" instead of just going straight to "Dumb". Whereas if that same user 2 years later keeps doing stupid shit, we might just jump to "Dumb".


We have useless ratings as it is, why not get rid of some of those?

 

id be more inclined to give passive aggressive "you tried" neutral ratings than flat out toxic dumb ratings just saying @Opalium

 

bless your soul.

 

+1
If you get triggered by a rating, you're a little bitch and deserve every negative rating you get. They're just there for entertainment anyway, so why not add some more.

MORE RATINGS AAAAAARGH

 

don't rate this post dumb or I'm going to get VERY ANGRY