Thumbs up button

Tell us how you think the forum can be improved. We will listen.
R1111
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by R1111 » Sat Feb 11, 2017 11:30 pm

David N. Snyder wrote:
Mkoll wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:Democracy is far from being a perfect system and the thumbs-up system would have all the faults of democracy (the majority don't decide truth) with all the corruption. I can see trolls conspiring together with practices like "I'll give you thumbs-up for all your posts if you do the same for me." And/or trolls could set up all kinds of sock-puppet (extra) accounts for the sole purpose of giving more thumbs-up to their own posts and thumbs-down for those that disagree with them. Yes, there are IP markings that mods can see, but there are now anonymizers and tor browsers to easily get around the IP identifications.
Couldn't this be fixed by requiring a certain number of posts before one can vote on anything? Say 15 or 25? Some forums have a minimum number of posts a new member has to make before they get certain privileges. DW may as well, but I don't remember.
Also very easy to circumvent. Remember a certain persistent member here who kept coming back over and over under different aliases? Some of his extra accounts had well over 100 posts.
100 posts to cast a like and 1 like per account?

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 10947
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by DNS » Sat Feb 11, 2017 11:36 pm

R1111 wrote: 100 posts to cast a like and 1 like per account?
1 like per account? What for? That would make it totally meaningless. We have a lot of members, but not that many. And then you only get one like vote? It would be like gold and how would you use it? Could you revoke it and change it to someone else? Completely meaningless, in my opinion.

R1111
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by R1111 » Sat Feb 11, 2017 11:57 pm

David N. Snyder wrote:
R1111 wrote:Completely meaningless, in my opinion.
I will try to come up with a better idea:) Sadhu for being critical in proper places!

User avatar
samseva
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by samseva » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:40 am

I think that an upvote system would be good. Two important reasons:

1. Knowing that people appreciated your post or that it helped someone out—which is different from now, because with zero visible feedback, you doubt if anyone even read what you wrote, and because of that you lose interest in helping people out in the future.
  • I've experienced this with my blog, and I'm sure many people have also experienced this on forums or for other things. You write a long and well-written post or article, thinking it will help someone out. However, no one responds or gives feedback—it is as if no one read it. But normally this isn't the case. Usually, many people read your post/article, and it probably helped a few people out. But it seems people don't really give feedback (one reason is that it disrupts the converstion), so you think you wrote the post/article for nothing and that you wasted your time, and then you don't feel motivated at all to post or help people in the future.
2. Users will write for quality. It's a good and natural quality control to increase good participation and wholesome discussions, and to reduce unwholesome/mindless chatter.
  • People posting 100s of times per month or even per week isn't all that uncommon. And whether people think this is the case or not, a lot of users—especially newcomers—base credibility on post count. Having an upvote system would point out the people who post good posts (either by number of upvotes, or upvotes-to-post ratio like on Zom's forum) and it would also be a small reminder for people who post only to increase their post count or for those spending most of their time in heated or political threads. Because of this, good discusions and participation would increase and unwholesome chatter would go down.
I think Dhamma Wheel is first and foremost a place to help people out and have worthwhile discussions on Dhamma, rather than unwholesome chatter. Having an upvote feature would help direct Dhamma Wheel a little more in that direction.

#UpvoteTheUpvoteFeature

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6379
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by Mkoll » Sun Feb 12, 2017 4:11 am

:goodpost:

Instead of making this post I could have just upvoted you! :mrgreen:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 10947
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by DNS » Sun Feb 12, 2017 4:29 am

Image

santa100
Posts: 2726
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by santa100 » Sun Feb 12, 2017 6:42 am

Mkoll wrote:Instead of making this post I could have just upvoted you!
Another thought just came to my mind: we don't have to change/add any new function to the existing way we've been doing things. We just have to turn around the display a bit. Ex: samseva just got 1 good-posting from Mkoll. Say John Doe gave another good-posting for samseva. Instead of showing 2 posts with the good-posting image, just display "2 upvotes" as a hyperlink and stick it to samseva's post, and when being hovered over, will show the identities of the voters Mkoll and John Doe. Again, no functional change to the existing way (non-intrusive), just reorganize the presentation layer and right away it can satisfy the 2 points samseva made.

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 1740
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by Zom » Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:08 am

(either by number of upvotes, or upvotes-to-post ratio like on Zom's forum)
No no, we don't have ratio number there -)
Ratio is calculated manually )

We have:

Posts: ___
Reputation: ___

Where reputation is your total number of upvotes. You just take a look and ...see: ow, this person writes too much but ow, his reputation is quite low. And that one writes trice as less, but his reputation is twice as big -)

perkele
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by perkele » Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:27 am

Bhikkhu Pesala in reply to [url=http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4747#p415296]this[/url] wrote:It was a very poor analogy for the use of reputation on forums.
No, it was not. It was actually quite good.
And your suggestion here that heavily downvoted messages should best be deleted once below a certain threshold if such a feature should be implemented is a prime example for the ugly kind of dynamics that would ensue as illustrated in that metaphorical story.
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Trolls are not innocent time travellers from 5BC who arrive by accident. They visit specifically to disrupt the forum.
I think the "trolls" you are talking about are largely fictional creatures - a very poor and superficial judgmental perception/mental fabrication from the comfortable position of a person "in good standing" within his preferred environment.
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:If someone gets a lot of downvotes, others will soon realise that they are not worth paying attention to.
I really like to hope (and actually believe) that would not be the case. A visibly negative reputation score would trigger lots of attention just as well as a visibly positive one (just of a different quality: inspiring aversion instead of admiration if one is auto-aligned with the ruling "plebs"; or maybe neutral, if one is still able to think for oneself). That is, of course, until such a person would disappear automatically due to his/her low reputation score.

I think Kim O'Hara has quoted and linked to a good line of argument here why an up/downvote mob rule system would not provide a good "mechanism" to simply get rid of "undesirable" contributors aka. "trolls":

I think it is good that the responsibility to deal with and take appopriate action in response to "disruptive" participators of any kind lies largely with a handful of specific trusted responsible individuals and the crowd's wisdom should be to learn tolerance.
binocular wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:If the quality of the Dhamma was determined by popular vote, then this may have some practical use.

However, since realistically it's not, this functionality is only likely to create tension and turn the art of posting into a popularity contest.
I third that.
Zom wrote:Newcomer sees whose posts worth paying attention and whose not so much .)
Far better for them would be able to rely on, exercise and cultivate their own sense of judgment and not have any system interfere with that.
Zom wrote:I can judge taking into account our russian theravada forum. It just works there and everyone is quite happy with the system. The majority there knows what is wrong and what is right and so good posts immediately get promotion and attention and don't lost among (mostly) meaningless or non-dhammic topics and conversations. But again, I'm okay with the present system on dhammawheel as well. The positive side of it is that it triggers less one's conceit.
Even though conceit can always find its way to be triggered, even without an overt "reputation system", I see much more down- than upsides with a reputation system on a site like this here which has developed well for many years without such.

perkele
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by perkele » Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:28 am

On the other hand,
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:upvotes for good posts quickly show one's appreciation without disrupting the conversation.
I agree with this. And I suppose that an "upvote-only" system as you described using on your (Zom's) Russian site could probably not do too much harm, if the "reputation info" is displayed in a small and not overimportant manner. I would still consider this info mostly irrelevant for most purposes.
I have seen too many places where unpopular messages could be downvoted into oblivion (automatically disappearing after a certain amount of upvotes) and the smug atmosphere in such environments on the side of those who "got it right".
R1111 wrote:Id like to see a reputation stat for members something like stackexchange.com, similar or better.
Try buddhism.stackexchange.com - why should all places be the same?
(I see that you have already stepped back from your idea. But just for the purpose of supporting my argument why a voting-system like that would not be a good idea here, I will have to be a bit more expansive to illustrate this.)
The stackexchange system works very well to generate high quality Q&A format information from knowledgable contributors on its various specialized sub-"stacks". But it is a very specific format with accordingly limited modes of interaction between people, very different from a free-for-all discussion forum like this one. The aim there is to generate high-quality condensed information content for easy reference and digestion, which seems to work best on the more "objective" sub-stacks, things like computing, math, information science etc... but also for many other fields surprisingly well (though I think for exploring and deeply investigating into the Buddha's teachings, it is not the most conducive mode of interaction). And they have very strict quality policies, behind all this there is a huge host of highly motivated voluntary moderators ("paid" by other members in "reputation") in well-organized hubs, in addition to a considerable amount of paid personell whose purpose it is to optimize the system and community dynamics for generating and ensuring high-quality content for the company's last-but-not-least (actually probably foremost) commercial interests (i.e. "selling" that high-quality content - earning money with advertisement to the many "customers"; and everything you write there becomes actually the property of the StackExchange company). The whole system, as well as it does work, especially for purely technical fields, is built around and designed to support a certain aim of material profit and could not even work that way otherwise. And this naturally comes with certain sacrifices and "casualties". Unfair downvoting of misunderstood but really good questions/answers happens there as well. The most stupid things are blocked out, but at the same time also the most interesting and educating questions that most just don't understand because it does not fit into their accustomed pre-defined format. Most people come there simply as consumers. And those who act as providers of quality information have to satisfy certain popular demands with regards to often quite superficially judgeable (up-down-votable) criteria that the masses can understand and apply somewhat semi-automatically (*). I think a similar dynamics would evolve on most platforms with up/down-vote systems, and this is just ill-suited for an open discussion forum.
(*) (I don't want to simply bash the stackexchange platform here, but primarily show that simple up and downvoting is not an automatic recipe for wholesome interaction, and also that StackExchange has a very special scope and purpose, and that a discussion forum like this should work differently. There are also quite a number of redeeming and ameliorating factors to the natural downsides of a simple up/downvote system implemented on StackExchange, which also motivate to participate in a helpful way and get along with each other, like the possibiliy for members to edit each other's posts, and being encouraged to do so in a constructive way [of only improving the quality], while not giving much room for extended opinion fights [such things are "moved to chat" and out of focus of the main Q&A content] - which makes stackexchange actually a very impressive, successful and motivating system for generating simply high-quality well-presented Q&A-format information.)

The focus here is more on interaction, open discussion, debate and enquiry (for which there is not much room on a platform like stackexchange). This can work much better without people being potentially quanitifably judged on every tiny utterance or interaction they make.
Last edited by perkele on Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:55 am, edited 3 times in total.

perkele
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by perkele » Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:29 am

But samseva made some good point here (his point number 1; with number 2 I have to disagree) for the usefulness of a simple up-vote system: It would be a simple and humble non-disruptive way (without interrupting any conversation or polling for attention) to give some positive feedback. I think this would be really not bad, and could be helpful and motivating for people who don't engage much in discussion, or simply make some contributions which don't leave much to be discussed about etc. (by simply giving good reasonable answers, for example, which I think, samseva for example, does a lot). Just to give an additional more quiet and "low-key" subtle feedback mechanism. If it would be implemented graphically humble enough to not become a primary focus, I think this could be worth to put some thought and effort into, IMO (and if such upvotes should count visibly for single messages; or for a cumulative score, if the recipient should see who upvoted/thanked him or not, etc. etc. - there could be a lot to think [and potentially get headaches] about, but it could be worthwhile).

To samseva's second point:
samseva wrote:2. Users will write for quality. It's a good and natural quality control to increase good participation and wholesome discussions, and to reduce unwholesome/mindless chatter.
Reputation score does not and can not equal quality or helpfulness or wholesomeness or... "dhammic aptitude". See retrofuturist's concise and to the point statement to sum up this whole issue.
Mkoll wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:It would just become a competition for who can get the most up-votes.
I wouldn't frame it like that. I'd frame it as encouragement to make the most high-quality posts. And that's not a bad thing.
No, it is (and cannot be anything else than) encouragement to make the most popular votes. See above.
samseva wrote:
  • People posting 100s of times per month or even per week isn't all that uncommon. And whether people think this is the case or not, a lot of users—especially newcomers—base credibility on post count. Having an upvote system would point out the people who post good posts (either by number of upvotes, or upvotes-to-post ratio like on Zom's forum) and it would also be a small reminder for people who post only to increase their post count or for those spending most of their time in heated or political threads. Because of this, good discusions and participation would increase and unwholesome chatter would go down.
I can hardly believe that there are people here who would post simply to increase their post count, which would just seem too bizarrely silly. (There is only one member here about whom I could have such a suspicion, but I have learned to tolerate him, and he also says and asks enough sensible things sometimes.) I also believe people who base credibility on post count, post "score" or "popular vote" (in whatever way and form) rather than post content, with due consideration of the appropriate context, are stupid and can not be helped (and should not be even encouraged in such tendencies). With an overt reputation system and people encouraged in that way to post for reputation I believe the effect would rather serve to exacerbate such potential problems. It is already the case that people here post for reputation (what else could they gain here, besides knowledge and wisdom - but who wants that?). And there are other ways and checks and balances to tell people to STFU (*). Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't.

(*) (or that one agrees with them; but here I agree with you, that a more subtle and humble way of acknowledgement could be helpful and provide a mostly wholesome way of interaction by providing silent thankful feedback, i.e. as exemplified by Mkoll here:
Mkoll wrote: :goodpost:

Instead of making this post I could have just upvoted you! :mrgreen:
I think that would be actually not bad.
Zom wrote:
What would be the point?
Newcomer sees whose posts worth paying attention and whose not so much .)
I think the benefit of this would just simply be to provide a non-disruptive way of expressing gratitude/acknowledgement/approval without making noise and interrupting the flow of the conversation, not so much to "reign in the newcomers". They should better find encouragement to judge for themselves.)
Last edited by perkele on Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

perkele
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by perkele » Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:29 am

To sum up my longwinded ramblings here: I appreciate the wisdom of the current regime to not implement an up/downvote system until this point. I think the idea of an upvote-only system could have some merits, but one would need to think about the specifics, what kind of information should be displayed, transferred and stored through such an upvote, visible for whom, with reference to a single post, or reference to the person in general? etc. etc. and one could get a lot of headaches trying to figure out the best possible most wholesome way to implement this.

I think this could point in a good direction already, though:
santa100 wrote:Another thought just came to my mind: we don't have to change/add any new function to the existing way we've been doing things. We just have to turn around the display a bit. Ex: samseva just got 1 good-posting from Mkoll. Say John Doe gave another good-posting for samseva. Instead of showing 2 posts with the good-posting image, just display "2 upvotes" as a hyperlink and when being hovered over, will show the identities of the voters Mkoll and John Doe. Again, no functional change to the existing way (non-intrusive), just reorganize the presentation layer and right away it can satisfy the 2 points samseva made.
In a very simplistic form I guess this could be implemented as a simple jquery plugin: Simply parse the contents of the posts of the current page, and if they contain only a "thumbs-up" emoticon, make the reference to the preceding post, or if they just contain a quote and a thumbs-up, make the reference to the post quoted. But here already comes the problem: There is no programmatic way to parse out from the post content which contains a quote followed by a "thumbs-up" the information which post it was that was quoted here. Also, if such a "good-post" message comes in response to some post pages ago, this reference could not be made in this way, as a simple javascript/jquery script to "reorganize the presentation layer" (if I interpreted that correctly). So I think the only feasible way to implement such a thing in a clean and overall functional way would be to mess with the phpbb platform. For sure it should be possible to find someone here willing and able to hack something like this together as a phpbb mod. @samseva? I think you are a web programmer or something, or are you not?
I think santa's suggested way here, to implement this on a per-post basis (not a reputation count for the person) could be actually the best way, and also the display of who gave thumbs-up, I think that would be neat, but one could also store the total count of upvotes for each person in the database and display it next to the avatar (although I find that less interesting and less nice to have and "accumulate").
Perhaps with a good demonstration page where this is implemented, and having done and prepared the gruntwork so that it can easily be installed, the rulers here could perhaps be convinced of its usefulness in such a form or similar.

I think this would be a nice and ostensably positive addition to the forum with hardly any downsides. But of course that is just my opinion and (influenced by others) suggestion. (And of course, my opinion is right. It is righter than YOURS in particular.)

Meanwhile (as long as no grand plan for this is figured out) I give my thumbs up to this:
David N. Snyder wrote:Image

R1111
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by R1111 » Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:18 am

I think we still should make some of the other changes tho like either choosing or not choosing a tradition and adding a heavily moderated contemporary discussion and debate subforum if someone wants to debate.
Last edited by R1111 on Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 3687
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:19 pm

samseva wrote:#UpvoteTheUpvoteFeature
:goodpost:
Last edited by Bhikkhu Pesala on Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
AIM ForumsPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 3687
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:26 pm

David N. Snyder wrote:Great big thumbsdown smiley
:roll: No attempt to discuss or comment, just an opinionated "Not on my watch" put down.

A simple downvote would be a much less obnoxious way to express your disapproval.

We would not be having this conversation at all if the Trolls were not allowed to run riot here, but some of us are suggesting ways that might bring trolling to the attention of the mods without disrupting the forum any further.
AIM ForumsPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

R1111
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by R1111 » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:34 pm

I also think any system should be compared to what is currently in place and not held up to ideal security standards before it is implemented. I mean the simple upvote/downvote with a visible username attached to it and a minimum of 100 posts to use the feature will make it very burdensome to exploit and certainly would have better expectation than what we have atm.

binocular
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by binocular » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:35 pm

perkele wrote:I think the benefit of this would just simply be to provide a non-disruptive way of expressing gratitude/acknowledgement/approval without making noise and interrupting the flow of the conversation, not so much to "reign in the newcomers".
What about the good old-fashioned way of private messaging someone and, you know, develop admirable friendship and all that?

In the old days of the internet, we would send eachother private messages titled "Accolades," "Kudos," "Thankyou," and such, and then actually put some thought into why we appreciated someone's input or what it was that we were grateful for. And we felt a measure of responsibility in regard to that person. So appreciation actually meant something.

But a voting system strikes me as a commercialized, superficial way of appreciating someone or something without investing much thought into it (or none at all). So it's not really appreciation, it's a mere shadow of it.

When I appreciate someone, I tell them so directly, with all the required words, and not with some skittish, superficial, mechanical "like". And I intend to continue to do so.

R1111
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by R1111 » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:44 pm

binocular wrote: What about the good old-fashioned way of private messaging someone and, you know, develop admirable friendship and all that?
I think there is little evidence to suggest that this culture will disappear.

As i see it the point of implementing the feedback system is to thank people for helpful posts and raise awareness of what is suspect to people in a transparent manner, minimizing giving legitimacy to potentialy wrong view, promoting what is known as right view and making it hard for wrong views to gain foothold in a contemporary enviroment, protecting the Dhamma.

However at the moment i think that not having a system like this is better because it doesnt give any legitimacy to wrong view at all, but only if we implement the heavy moderation of Dhamma discussion and contemporary debate of Tipitaka and effectively make it impossible to troll while promoting right view in proper debate based on Instructions in the Suttas instead, these Suttas are important i think it is a shame they arent strictly implemented.
In a framework like this Right View will flourish, contemporaries will debate efficiently and learn alot, everybody will benefit. Wrong views and ideas will quickly be identified as such and there will be little inappropriate discussion and debate on sensitive subjects.
Last edited by R1111 on Sun Feb 12, 2017 1:28 pm, edited 10 times in total.

binocular
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by binocular » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:49 pm

R1111 wrote:As i see if the point of implementing the feedback system is to thank people for good posts and raise awareness of what is suspect to people in a transparent manner, minimizing giving legitimacy to potentialy wrong view, promoting what is known as right view and making it hard for wrong views to gain foothold in a contemporary enviroment, protecting the Dhamma.
I am referring again to the post by Retro, the first reply in this thread.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3770
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Thumbs up button

Post by SDC » Sun Feb 12, 2017 3:17 pm

With or without this function, reputation will follow your member name. This is quite obvious when it comes to how we address each other's posts. It is easy to pick up on it. We grow to expect things from each other. I think having any sort of system to rate members is merely stating the obvious, but will have the added problem of creating a pointless popularity contest with some members getting either praise or blame they don't deserve. No one should have the luxury to coast (or sink) based on past performance.

Seems like grounds for a deceptive environment especially with regards to how new members come to understand longer standing members.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests