Enable did you find this post useful for first post of thread also

Originally Posted by Telengard I did, and not as a troll. It just seemed to me that a post with no content is unhelpful. You may think this is foolish, but I don't think so if it furthers this discussion in a productive way. No slight against Anisha was intended. I believe Anisha to be mature and intelligent enough to understand this. I wouldn't object to that, provided the intent of the system is clearly explained and the implementation reflects that intent.

I wasn't discussing the merit of the downvote. I just wanted to clarify whether downvoting can be viewed in the "Reputation" system on your control panel. Anisha Kaul's post seemed to indicate that downvotes are anonymous and hence downvoting is pretty much a free-for-all. Is this correct?

As mentioned earlier, perhaps downvoting could lead to people taking the issue too personally.

Anyway we seem to have drifted a bit off topic somewhat.

Originally Posted by vharishankar I wasn't discussing the merit of the downvote.

I can see that, but someone did. So please forgive me for using your comment as a springboard to "illustrate how flawed this post rating/reputation system is."

I just wanted to clarify whether downvoting can be viewed in the "Reputation" system on your control panel. Anisha Kaul's post seemed to indicate that downvotes are anonymous and hence downvoting is pretty much a free-for-all. Is this correct?

I can see who clicks yes or no on my own posts from my LQ UserCP. Other users (who are not me) can view my reputation for a short list of my most recent posts which were rated yes or no, but not who voted. When I view Anisha's reputation (for example) I can see her most recent ratings, but not who rated.

Originally Posted by vharishankar Anisha Kaul, you can see the person who downvoted you in your user control panel, right?

No, it is not possible to see who downvoted. We can only see who upvoted.

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul No, it is not possible to see who downvoted. We can only see who upvoted.

Now that I look again, I think you are correct. I'm sure someone downvoted one of my posts recently, but I don't see it in the list. This must be new.

/me = confused

Originally Posted by Telengard Now that I look again, I think you are correct. I'm sure someone downvoted one of my posts recently, but I don't see it in the list. This must be new. /me = confused

No, it is not new, it is quite old.
Read the reputation thread.

OK, in which case I am even more in favour of removing the downvote altogether. After all, there is no negative reputation on this board. So why keep the downvote?

Originally Posted by Telengard I believe Anisha to be mature and intelligent enough to understand this.

TBH, LQ's experience has taught Anisha to understand that different
people have different views of common senses, and there is no "standard"
common sense. LQ has also taught Anisha to thicken her skin when it
comes to petty issues.

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul TBH, LQ has made Anisha mature and intelligent enough to understand that different people have different views of common senses, and there is no "standard" common sense. LQ has also taught Anisha to thicken her skin when it comes to petty issues.

*whew!* Reading that is a relief.

In deference to vharishankar, there have been plenty of times I wanted to click yes on the opening post of a thread. In the future I'll try to remember the reputation icon, as rightfully indicated by Anisha Kaul.

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul TBH, LQ's experience has taught Anisha to understand that different people have different views of common senses, and there is no "standard" common sense. LQ has also taught Anisha to thicken her skin when it comes to petty issues.

Thickening skin is quite admiral but, and I know you don't agree, common sense says to me at least that this feature is abused and even though we can't see who is doing it you can sometimes take an educated guess and be correct. This then leads to personality clashes, not just philosophical disagreements but wholesale personality clashes, and that is not good for anyone.

Originally Posted by k3lt01 Thickening skin is quite admiral but, and I know you don't agree, common sense says to me at least that this feature is abused

I admit the feature at time causes head scratching. I've seen threads where a member, or a group of members, seem to have marked every post of a single person as "unhelpful" based solely on a certain stance. And I agree the fact any marking is untraceable leads to abuse because anybody who did not participate in a thread may mark posts as "unhelpful", even if they clearly are. Problem is people who find such a thread will only know what is helpful or not if they read topic-related threads or posts or possess sufficient knowledge to judge information themselves already, which a user who is new to Linux might not have.

Originally Posted by k3lt01 and even though we can't see who is doing it you can sometimes take an educated guess and be correct. This then leads to personality clashes, not just philosophical disagreements but wholesale personality clashes, and that is not good for anyone.

I agree that, while the feature enables members to show their appreciation, it is not seldomly re-purposed for expressing whatever allegiances or temper. Then it is no longer about what the voter thinks of the quality of the posted content but becomes about what the voter thinks of the poster. And since it's untraceable no amount of explanation (or re-education ;-p) may be able to change any of that when individuals lose sight of what is good for the LQ community.

If you read that as a vote for disabling marking posts as unhelpful, it is.

Originally Posted by unSpawn I agree that, while the feature enables members to show their appreciation, it is not seldomly re-purposed for expressing whatever allegiances or temper. Then it is no longer about what the voter thinks of the quality of the posted content but becomes about what the voter thinks of the poster. And since it's untraceable no amount of explanation (or re-education ;-p) may be able to change any of that when individuals lose sight of what is good for the LQ community. If you read that as a vote for disabling marking posts as unhelpful, it is.

I think that the reputation system has accomplished the goal it was intended to do. There are reasons that negative responses are not listed, any remarks or listings would entice a flame war.

The positive votes have made a lot of posters more conscious of their tone in their posts.

I can remember when it was pretty tough for a 'dumb' (not familiar with linux) newbie when he posted questions that did not explain or use the right terminology.

Maybe the question should be rephrased as a statement like

I found this post useful

as a link for a positive vote and down votes and enable it on the first post of threads also.

How about replacing the "is it helpful yes/no" with a "Mark this post as high quality" button and also enable that for the first post in a thread.

Would that clear up the confusion over what it is intended for and make everyone happy? Ironically, the old 'thanks' implementation would probably do the job with a change of label.

LOL GazL I beat you to it.

So you did. We must be onto something!