FA+
Shop
Ratings system
11 years ago
General
A few of the sites I'm on have a rating system, a +1 or -1 if you will. As is obvious, the more +1's the entries receive, the more attention it gets. In a perfect world, this system would work as a guideline as to what is considered decent to view. But this is not a perfect world.
This system is inherently flawed and needs safeguards for abuse. So many times we have all experienced the liberty the internet gives us, with the liberty comes the downsides as well. We are all merely a facade, a mask we wear that either defines us or hides us. I don't care for faces as they exist in the real world, but making a statement that we are as we present ourselves to others. Some use this as a wall to hide behind, taking full advantage of the separation and displacement these series of 1's and 0's offer.
There are those that wear a mask at work, talk around the water cooler and joke with the rest of the crowd to fit in. For those that show their true selves, sometimes labels are applied unjustly. Some don't care what they are called, some do, and thus the mask of conformity. But all to often the masks can hide something ugly, something you would rather not see, in a metaphorical sense, not as it relates to beauty. Those that wear them take them off at home, donning another or being what truly lies underneath.
It's the nameless shapeless faces in the crowd, the ones that use their mask to belittle or chant one's demise. It may be who they truly are, or a way of directing anger from their life towards others in the hope that spreading bad moods is the cure for what they are feeling. Infantile slurs we all have felt, spurts of single words that are meant to slowly tear away at you, or a pre-pubescent tyraid that draws in one's mother, father and nether regions. Because we cannot reach out and deal a hoof-ful of justice, we feel powerless. Those that say "Stick and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me" are what I like to call "Doosh Canoes". After all, if this was true, then why do the word's 'Guilty' or 'Innocent' bring relief or dread when the gavel bangs?
Too often those online are on a silent mission to sink the proverbial battleship, to bring everyone else down. Instead of ignoring what they don't like, they go out of their way to make internet life hell for those they target, for no reason at all sometimes. This is the failings of the +/- system.
Most sites that use a rating system like this do not require any input other than a click, and a continuous stream of doing this bears to consequences. When this system is tied in with filters, it can be demoralizing and devastating, allowing those that put effort into good work to be unseen if the filters are set to remove low rating pieces from view. AS there are things on FA that I do not like, I avoid them, but they are still glanced over for a mere second, and even sometimes the concept intrigues me and I find something that I like. If I were to filter things out, I may be missing something I could potentially like.
With no repercussions from serial down rating, it becomes all to easy to drive someone into the ground, as their hard work becomes ignored, regardless of the quality that may appeal to some. This is also detrimental if the browsers see a large negative feedback vote, causing them to avoid such as the rest of the population deems unworthy instead of thinking for themselves and go with the flow.
I have done some talking with those on such sites, and it seems that alot of the ratings are not properly given. In a selfish desire to push their work above others, they can merely take a fraction of a second to add a negative point and send the work down the line with a deceitful mark without reviewing the content themselves. This can force works that are good to become drowned to their own self appointed 'masterpieces'.
A system without ramifications for one's actions WILL be abused. Like websites that ask for feedback, I feel that these systems need a check and balance to them. A way to root out the 'troll' votes from the actual ones that may be deserved.
Imagine for a second that FA has this system, where you were allowed to vote on each picture. There are some genres that are not too popular here, and would become washed in a torrent of down votes that would send some to tears. Then couple this with a system that displays the top rated pieces out front. 90% of FA artwork would probably never get seen by those that like the genre and subject mater.
Furaffinity has rather, a good system of 'voting', if one could call it that. Instead of being a faceless entity who can enter something derogatory without a name attached, it's an upbeat system of numbers that lets the poster know what is popular. View counters and favorites. From these two alone, once can gauge interest. If I post something that gets 2,000 views and 60 or so faves in a week, I consider that popular. If something I post gets 40 views and 3 faves in a week, that could be seen as not popular, my thoughts aside of how I like it. This can tailor what one does and posts, even with a lull of activity, eventually the continual postings of material will draw in a crowd of those that like them. IF someone here decides to make their displeasure shown, it has to be done in physical form through that of a post. IF the dislike is valid and criticism is received on a level that helps, it is known. But we all have seen the posts: 'WTF?' 'How could you like this?' and so on in that manner. These kinds of ill-thought vocalizations can be seen continually, building an opinion on the person voicing them and not on the work they disagree with.
If these sites REQUIRED a posting as to why they added a -1 vote, it would be apparent as to why they left it in the first place. Honest criticism can be taken, but those that simply mash the keyboards with asinine drivel being posted can be rooted out as a troll, and give them a face and reputation to go with it.
I also think that a timer of sorts would solve problems on story related posts. If it takes the average person 10 minutes to read 2,000 words, this can be a base for a filter. If someone goes on a submission, rates it down in 30 seconds, the vote goes into 'limbo'. The vote is then checked against the time table. With a preset timer of 20 minutes on a 4,000 word piece, anything within a few minutes of that time stamp can be counted as legitimate. Where as anything outside of the 20 minute stamp (+ or - 5 minutes) would count against them.
This brings up a new dynamic that would keep those from down rating without legitimate purpose. Each rating that is flagged as deceitful (I/E they did not review the material or left the window open for an hour to run down the 30 minute timer) can add a point to an honor system. Too many negative points toward their user wold result in the removal of the rating system from them for a period of time, and a continued violation could result in a suspended account for a period of time. Continued repeat violations could result in an outright permanent ban. This adds in accountability, making sure that what is given towards a work is valid.
With the system left as it is, someone can go around and dislike in minutes, materials and works that would take days to consume if properly gone through. Imagine if I went around and starting vocalizing what I don't like, and trolling with dumb shit. It would leave a mark on me, as on FA, I have to input with my name attached to do such things. If FA would allow me to do the same thing, but anonymously with numbers... People here would go insane without a valid reason for why their works were being shunned. It's not even criticism, just as guide-less slap in the face beating them down without telling them why.
I just want to get on the internet and disconnect from real life, live in a fantasy world for a while where anything is possible. To engage in peace and serenity with those who share my interests, and even at some points take part in a violent bloody massacre of digital pixels that I can withdraw from when I am satiated. I want to learn and grow at my leisure and not be accosted by single syllable simpletons that ram the real world into my own personal world...
This system is inherently flawed and needs safeguards for abuse. So many times we have all experienced the liberty the internet gives us, with the liberty comes the downsides as well. We are all merely a facade, a mask we wear that either defines us or hides us. I don't care for faces as they exist in the real world, but making a statement that we are as we present ourselves to others. Some use this as a wall to hide behind, taking full advantage of the separation and displacement these series of 1's and 0's offer.
There are those that wear a mask at work, talk around the water cooler and joke with the rest of the crowd to fit in. For those that show their true selves, sometimes labels are applied unjustly. Some don't care what they are called, some do, and thus the mask of conformity. But all to often the masks can hide something ugly, something you would rather not see, in a metaphorical sense, not as it relates to beauty. Those that wear them take them off at home, donning another or being what truly lies underneath.
It's the nameless shapeless faces in the crowd, the ones that use their mask to belittle or chant one's demise. It may be who they truly are, or a way of directing anger from their life towards others in the hope that spreading bad moods is the cure for what they are feeling. Infantile slurs we all have felt, spurts of single words that are meant to slowly tear away at you, or a pre-pubescent tyraid that draws in one's mother, father and nether regions. Because we cannot reach out and deal a hoof-ful of justice, we feel powerless. Those that say "Stick and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me" are what I like to call "Doosh Canoes". After all, if this was true, then why do the word's 'Guilty' or 'Innocent' bring relief or dread when the gavel bangs?
Too often those online are on a silent mission to sink the proverbial battleship, to bring everyone else down. Instead of ignoring what they don't like, they go out of their way to make internet life hell for those they target, for no reason at all sometimes. This is the failings of the +/- system.
Most sites that use a rating system like this do not require any input other than a click, and a continuous stream of doing this bears to consequences. When this system is tied in with filters, it can be demoralizing and devastating, allowing those that put effort into good work to be unseen if the filters are set to remove low rating pieces from view. AS there are things on FA that I do not like, I avoid them, but they are still glanced over for a mere second, and even sometimes the concept intrigues me and I find something that I like. If I were to filter things out, I may be missing something I could potentially like.
With no repercussions from serial down rating, it becomes all to easy to drive someone into the ground, as their hard work becomes ignored, regardless of the quality that may appeal to some. This is also detrimental if the browsers see a large negative feedback vote, causing them to avoid such as the rest of the population deems unworthy instead of thinking for themselves and go with the flow.
I have done some talking with those on such sites, and it seems that alot of the ratings are not properly given. In a selfish desire to push their work above others, they can merely take a fraction of a second to add a negative point and send the work down the line with a deceitful mark without reviewing the content themselves. This can force works that are good to become drowned to their own self appointed 'masterpieces'.
A system without ramifications for one's actions WILL be abused. Like websites that ask for feedback, I feel that these systems need a check and balance to them. A way to root out the 'troll' votes from the actual ones that may be deserved.
Imagine for a second that FA has this system, where you were allowed to vote on each picture. There are some genres that are not too popular here, and would become washed in a torrent of down votes that would send some to tears. Then couple this with a system that displays the top rated pieces out front. 90% of FA artwork would probably never get seen by those that like the genre and subject mater.
Furaffinity has rather, a good system of 'voting', if one could call it that. Instead of being a faceless entity who can enter something derogatory without a name attached, it's an upbeat system of numbers that lets the poster know what is popular. View counters and favorites. From these two alone, once can gauge interest. If I post something that gets 2,000 views and 60 or so faves in a week, I consider that popular. If something I post gets 40 views and 3 faves in a week, that could be seen as not popular, my thoughts aside of how I like it. This can tailor what one does and posts, even with a lull of activity, eventually the continual postings of material will draw in a crowd of those that like them. IF someone here decides to make their displeasure shown, it has to be done in physical form through that of a post. IF the dislike is valid and criticism is received on a level that helps, it is known. But we all have seen the posts: 'WTF?' 'How could you like this?' and so on in that manner. These kinds of ill-thought vocalizations can be seen continually, building an opinion on the person voicing them and not on the work they disagree with.
If these sites REQUIRED a posting as to why they added a -1 vote, it would be apparent as to why they left it in the first place. Honest criticism can be taken, but those that simply mash the keyboards with asinine drivel being posted can be rooted out as a troll, and give them a face and reputation to go with it.
I also think that a timer of sorts would solve problems on story related posts. If it takes the average person 10 minutes to read 2,000 words, this can be a base for a filter. If someone goes on a submission, rates it down in 30 seconds, the vote goes into 'limbo'. The vote is then checked against the time table. With a preset timer of 20 minutes on a 4,000 word piece, anything within a few minutes of that time stamp can be counted as legitimate. Where as anything outside of the 20 minute stamp (+ or - 5 minutes) would count against them.
This brings up a new dynamic that would keep those from down rating without legitimate purpose. Each rating that is flagged as deceitful (I/E they did not review the material or left the window open for an hour to run down the 30 minute timer) can add a point to an honor system. Too many negative points toward their user wold result in the removal of the rating system from them for a period of time, and a continued violation could result in a suspended account for a period of time. Continued repeat violations could result in an outright permanent ban. This adds in accountability, making sure that what is given towards a work is valid.
With the system left as it is, someone can go around and dislike in minutes, materials and works that would take days to consume if properly gone through. Imagine if I went around and starting vocalizing what I don't like, and trolling with dumb shit. It would leave a mark on me, as on FA, I have to input with my name attached to do such things. If FA would allow me to do the same thing, but anonymously with numbers... People here would go insane without a valid reason for why their works were being shunned. It's not even criticism, just as guide-less slap in the face beating them down without telling them why.
I just want to get on the internet and disconnect from real life, live in a fantasy world for a while where anything is possible. To engage in peace and serenity with those who share my interests, and even at some points take part in a violent bloody massacre of digital pixels that I can withdraw from when I am satiated. I want to learn and grow at my leisure and not be accosted by single syllable simpletons that ram the real world into my own personal world...
I would argue against the "+" parameter--sometimes people take longer than average to read a piece. I've got a few pages open in my phone browser that I pop open whenever and might finish over the course of a few days, whenever I have free time.
I think your better idea would be to force people to justify downvotes, not necessarily as a public comment, but as a paragraph or so of privately stored text. If nothing happens, that text is never seen. If an author/artist complains that they are being harassed by malicious downvoting, the admins can review the paragraph--which will NOT be seen by the artist, but if it brings up some semi-legitimate beef, the admins might paraphrase in communication to the artist/author. This prevents retaliation.
Someone whose downvotes are deemed malicious one too many times, could have their downvoting privileges revoked. If they try to get around the ban by creating sock puppet accounts, it's a permaban, just as if they used multiple accounts for any other form of harassment.
Or, y'know, just get rid of the downvote system entirely in favor of something similar to FA or IB. I've seen several sites with downvoting options, and it just never seems to work out well. Terrible works might still have a good ratio of upvotes/downvotes, because the few people who care enough to click may tend to upvote... while well-written controversial pieces might have a horde of downvotes from the self-styled "moral crusaders".
Having a system that only allows "+1" and "report as inappropriate" would be much better (as long as reports require a 300 character description of why the TOS/copyright/law was broken, so people have to try and convince an admin that this stuff should not be here - too many dodgy reports will get a user/IP banned).
But, it's still The Internet. Being anonymous results in people being dicks.
On an art site, there are two main reasons why you'd +1 or -1 something: quality and topic.
A piece that is executed really well? +1
A piece that isn't that greatly made, but the topic excites me? +1
A piece that is just plain crap? Meh. Nil vote.
The topic disgusts me? -1 no matter how well it's made
if we had a voteing systme that only have +1 per computer vote it seem like it be good and frount page show votes of hightist of the week and raindom spotlight for art that dosent get seen coz of it
there be a problem in that somewhere and always do
nothing perfect
if it was perfect it be broken already as there no such word
real votes are comments you get real likes are people putting effert into what they say and not
omg so hawt
or i dont like this (why they have the need to go on stuff they dont like i never understand)
i have read stories with 400 positive marks that barely deserve a hundred, yet read 400 mark stories that are at least 1000 mark worthy. ultimately you need to read it yourself i guess.
people liking a story depends on the people. some guys have poor taste to be honest or like a story for a singular reason. or they just like it for reasons incomprehensible to the human mind.