New feature: Vote comments up/down

New feature: Vote comments up/down

As part of our ongoing redesign we've added a new feature: the ability for logged-in users to vote comments up and down.

At the moment, all this does is display the number of up and down votes under the comment. This follows feedback from users that many people lurk but don't post. This means people often find a post useful or informative, but don't have a quick and easy way to show their appreciation. In this sense, an 'up' is analogous to a Facebook 'like'. Ups will also help admins spot useful links or additional info to edit into news articles, as we'll be making more effort to convert breaking news threads in the forums into news articles for the newswire.

On the other hand, people may find a comment unhelpful or rude, without it necessarily meriting being reported for breaching the site rules, and this gives a quick way for people to express that without getting into an argument about it (as ups/downs are anonymous).

For now we want to try this out and see how people use it and see how well it works. In the future, it will make various things possible, though we haven't decided what to do with it yet. We would be able to create blocks of 'most popular comments' as well as most recent e.g. in the side bar of forums or blogs. This would help stop valuable contributions disappearing so quickly.

We might also be able to auto-collapse posts that receive X number of down votes with a link to display them (a bit like YouTube does), or even to auto-unpublish such posts. We'd need to set the thresholds right for this to be useful though and to prevent abuse. We could also potentially do things like colour code comments according to which have been most/least popular and things like that too.

Posted By

libcom
Feb 26 2012 18:50

Share

Attached files

Comments

the button
Mar 7 2012 11:35
gypsy wrote:
just upped you. ;)

Joseph Kay
Mar 7 2012 11:38
snipfool wrote:
gypsy wrote:
revol68 wrote:
yeah it's especially fucked up if mods and admins can see who votes for what but others can't.
.

Aye it means that they can see if ppl have a vendetta against them but we can't. Not fair.

i have a feeling that admins have probably given themselves the same front end experience as us and haven't gone out of their way to hide the voters from regular users. but as admins (at least some) have access to the database, they could check there. and it would definitely need to be stored in the database in order to know if you've upped or downed already.

Exactly. If it's being abused, we could find out who's doing it (which is unavoidable, since it has to keep a record to prevent multiple votes). But as it's a trial we're seeing what happens. If it can be broken by a couple of people with too much time on their hands throwing a tantrum they're not getting their way, then we'll need to change the way it works. Personally, i'm already glazing over small down votes as they're everywhere and therefore meaningless.

gypsy
Mar 7 2012 11:39

rat
Mar 7 2012 11:41

Down is the new Up.

Joseph Kay
Mar 7 2012 11:46
revol68 wrote:
ah diddums, you sound like Grayling.

Normally people are comparing themselves to the Kronstadt Commune by this point, aim higher.

the button
Mar 7 2012 11:46

Choccy
Mar 7 2012 21:45
revol68 wrote:
at the moment I've been half arsed in my voting things down because unlike choccy I was smart enough to realise that if you vote everything down it's easier to work out. Best to keep it pretty much random.

i see your FUCK SHIT UP tattoo has served you well!

Choccy
Mar 7 2012 21:47

I almost UPPED The Button's and Revol's posts
but I remembered MY CODE

Mike Harman
Mar 8 2012 13:24
snipfool wrote:
i have a feeling that admins have probably given themselves the same front end experience as us and haven't gone out of their way to hide the voters from regular users. but as admins (at least some) have access to the database, they could check there. and it would definitely need to be stored in the database in order to know if you've upped or downed already.

Yep.

jef costello
Mar 8 2012 18:14

Voting everything down is a bit childish. I did it on this thread for fun, but I don't see the point in trying to fuck up something I don't think will work.

I do think it's funny that you're trying to mount a direct action campaign using the dislike button though. Very post-ironic-meta-facebook

Choccy
Mar 8 2012 21:01

lol you think i do it beyond this thread
BELLEND

bzfgt
Mar 8 2012 22:16

I think it's great because most people don't vote thus a small minority can have an effect. Plus I can 'up' my own posts. I will 'up' this one.

jolasmo
Mar 8 2012 22:39

People seriously need to get a grip. If you hate this feature then it's incredibly easy to ignore it, there's no need for seven pages of whinging about how this is the cancer that is killing libcom. The AF internal forum has a similar feature and it works fine.

Personally I think it would have made more sense if it tallied up the ups/downs rather than just showing you the number of each, but whatever. It's certainly convenient to be able to up something rather than clogging up threads with posts that just say 'this', 'what they said', or whatever.

~J.

Steven.
Mar 8 2012 22:49
Choccy wrote:
lol you think i do it beyond this thread
BELLEND

Somebody was, but it looks like they have given up now

tastybrain
Mar 9 2012 02:26
revol68 wrote:
Twats whinging about how easy is to ignore are missing the point, its the fact that its whole concept is anti communist, I'm not joking either. It's the ideology of late capitalism, inane ideas of feedback and accountability, with no substance.

laugh out loud LOL---

Oh. You're not joking. Nevermind.

working class
Mar 9 2012 03:42

You should not have to log in to see these bloody votes! The votes are meant for the public, not for a select bunch of nobodies who decide to make an account! cry

Chilli Sauce
Apr 12 2012 01:01

So I've been thinking about it and, as I said previously, the real test of the up/down rating system is a debate. On the most recent parecon thread, the pareconistas have had the fuck downed out of them. Granted, they deserve it, but I still think it could offput new users who are new to the politics of this site. The point being: just a simple up function serves the same purpose but avoids the potential hard feelings that come from an onslaught of down votes, especially for a new user.

no1
Apr 12 2012 08:19

I partly agree with Chilli - but instead of getting rid of it, I think it would be good to transform the 'down' function to express disapproval of a poster's behaviour, esp. if they are trollish or abusive or arguing in bad faith, but not disapproval of what they are saying.

Chilli Sauce
Apr 12 2012 09:44

Wouldn't that be mostly covered in the report button already?

Chilli Sauce
Apr 12 2012 09:47

Wouldn't that be mostly covered in the report button already?

Auld-bod
Apr 12 2012 10:19

Everyone will have their own criteria on how to use the buttons normally mine are:

Up - a strong view with which I agree 75-100%
- An excellent argument or point with which I may not have too much sympathy!

Down – a post with which I strongly disagree
- someone acting the raw prawn

Choccy
Apr 12 2012 12:03

Still piss-poor faux participatory wank.
Like Ayer's emotivism distilled, it simply comes across as 'boo-hiss i don't like this' without having to formulate a reason why or generate a sustainable counter.

Spikymike
Apr 12 2012 13:52

Experiment has failed - time to end it.

gypsy
Apr 13 2012 09:05

Agreed comrade Spikymike.

Steven.
Apr 13 2012 11:35
Choccy wrote:
Still piss-poor faux participatory wank.
Like Ayer's emotivism distilled, it simply comes across as 'boo-hiss i don't like this' without having to formulate a reason why or generate a sustainable counter.

you say that, but that's not how it is working in practice. Look at the discussions were people have had loads of downs, like the pacifist on the Greek anarchists trashing the fascist offices thread, or the parecon organisation discussion going on now. There were lots of up/down votes but also lots of arguments put one way and the other.

So it's not like people voted and didn't bother making a point.

However, looking at both of those discussions it is clear that the majority feeling on here is opposed to pacifism and parecon, which I think is a good thing, and helpful for readers to be able to see.

D
Apr 13 2012 11:52

I like the 'up' option as it allows those who might feel uncomfortable posting to show what they agree with. It also means you can support an opinion when you agree with it but don't have anything to add, writing a post just saying 'I agree with xxx' seems a waste of time so this avoids that problem.

It also can offer a little insight into what most libcommers agree with. Without it an opinion appears more popular based solely on what most people who post say and this can be bias towards people who have the confidence to post/ those determined to 'win' an argument through repeated posting. Of course the up problem isn't completely valid either as evidence of the dominant view on Libcom either but I think it's an improvement

I'm not too sure on the 'down' button though. Like others have said I think this may just discourage others from posting

Choccy
Apr 13 2012 13:32
Steven. wrote:
Choccy wrote:
Still piss-poor faux participatory wank.
Like Ayer's emotivism distilled, it simply comes across as 'boo-hiss i don't like this' without having to formulate a reason why or generate a sustainable counter.

you say that, but that's not how it is working in practice. Look at the discussions were people have had loads of downs, like the pacifist on the Greek anarchists trashing the fascist offices thread, or the parecon organisation discussion going on now. There were lots of up/down votes but also lots of arguments put one way and the other.

So it's not like people voted and didn't bother making a point.

However, looking at both of those discussions it is clear that the majority feeling on here is opposed to pacifism and parecon, which I think is a good thing, and helpful for readers to be able to see.

Anecdotes about a single thread don't really wash.

It's boo-hiss nameless finger pointing without having to construct anything resembling an argument and that's how it's being used in the majority of threads so far. Lazy faux-participation that doesn't get at the root of the problems with participation.

Choccy
Apr 13 2012 15:29

Yep quite a disturbing feature that is embedded into this sort of anonymous lazy fake participation.

S. Artesian
Apr 13 2012 15:42

It's bullshit. Time to drop it. It adds nothing to the content of the discussion.

It's an adaptation to the Facebook mentality.

radicalgraffiti
Apr 13 2012 16:03

disturbing lol, and you expect people to take your objectiosn seriusly, as if thie kind of crap diserves an actual responce