We have been playing around with up/down vote functionality for the past couple of weeks and just activated it in the Lounge prior to this thread.
1. Everyone can vote a post up or down. The vote totals themselves show up on the bottom right of the post. You can't vote on your own posts (the up/down vote is hidden), but you will see the totals once it's voted on.
2. If a post meets some criteria for being "good," the post will be given a yellow border (so that others are drawn to the "good posts" in a big thread).
3. Similarly, if a post meets some criteria for a "bad post," it will be shaded. If a post meets criteria for a "terrible post," it will be shown collapsed with a red bar. The red bar of a collapsed post shows the user's name, and you can click a button at the right to show the post.
4. This functionality doesn't mess with the order of posts.
I'm using "some criteria" only because we're sure it'll change. The border, shading, and collapsed posts are based on the difference between up and down votes, not a total number of one or the other. We'll be making adjustments based on usage, especially with collapsed posts.
We have questions about whether it'll work here vs a place like reddit. A few of us like the idea while others have brought up legitimate concerns. In the end, we decided to roll it out, at least temporarily.
This is a trial run.
We'll give it a week or two depending on how things go, then we'll put it to a vote as long as it's not an obviously terrible idea. The goal is make threads a little easier to scroll through -- easier to find the best contributions and easier to scroll past the trolling and derailments. We aren't out to completely hide posts and will adjust as needed to keep that percentage really low, or based on your feedback. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RealSNR:
Yes. It absolutely is.
One of them is an empty dismissal. You know where you stand in the conversation. It's harmless. It might even be funny if it's done creatively.
The JPB way is making assumptions about your intelligence and/or education, all with the same outcome: It's not good enough for me to respond to you genuinely. Lord, for the number of times a person who disagrees with him is stupid, this entire forum must be the biggest collection of morons and assholes on the internet!
Oh, here's another good one. You write a few sentences to him about why you disagree, or you point something out that he said, and he responds with, "That's not what I said. You can't read" and doesn't elaborate at all. There have been actual times where I show his quote to him in the same post and copy/paste it AGAIN, this time with "You said:" as a preface, and he'll tell me to learn to read, because I misconstrued his argument.
Bingo.
And you’re still a fucking idiot for obsessing over Geno Smith. [Reply]
Me: "I need a list of single horny old ladies in my retirement community that are most likely to give me a blowjob or sex when drunk?"
ChatGPT: "There are currently (14) widowed, single or divorced women available in your community over (55) years old that match your criteria. Your results are:
(6) find you repulsive
(3) will throw up on you when drunk
(2) haven't had sex in over 25 years and their vaginas have dried up.
(1) has dementia
(1) wear diapers because she always shits her pants
(1) has STD's
We recommend moving."
