Ratings .... Ye or Nay

Are you being pedantic for the sake of it?
I’ve already said I agree with the introduction of more ratings. I’m not disagreeing with their introduction.

I have made it clear that it’s the emojis that I think adds no value. You have agreed, that ‘ratings’ will do the job just as well. So why the argument?

 

Is there a new forum called votes arse, or is that just what autocorrect turns cows arse into currently?

 

Ratings will do the job. We could have agree, disagree, hats off, funny, poo. One for each emoji

 

Well @BoingBoing?

Is this being conveniently ignored or did you genuinely miss it?

 

Think he missed it as he didn’t understand my reply

 

If it is aimed at me, I did write Cows Arse and checked it. So I’m not sure what or who wrote votes Arse?

Sorry maybe you’re having a conversation with someone else?

 

Strangely enough it was in reply to the bit quoted in my post. That is how quoting works

 

No more to be said on the matter

 

Thank god

 

Yeah.

 

What’s the address to this other forum?

 

Google it. It's Bradford City's oldest running forum so it'll definitely be there

 

Now that would deserve a "funny"!

Thus my opinion hasn't changed. Adding ratings etc. is rather a solution looking for a problem that doesn't here exist. The "like" button stands in very well for any of: like, agree, funny, thank you, and any other positive responses. Common courtesy, along with the point of a discussion forum, suggest that negative responses, e.g. dislike and disagree, should be explained in greater detail.

RCB

 

I often used to browse C & B using the ratings as an indicator and whilst it obviously wasnt 100% accurate, it went some way towards reducing the amount of BS i read on days where i simply did not want to read it.

I'd also argue that ratings reflecting a range of different emotions allow greater flexibility than just a 'like' and, imo of course, provide an interesting insight into the consensus of a particular post.

Others also make valid points. Often it's neccessary to 'disagree' with a particular post but it's not always suitable to explain why that's the case post after post, mainly because it's not particulary interesting for others. There have been many tedious, prolonged discussions where a simple 'disagree' button would be better suited.

People do see the value in them,and those that don't are not forced to use them.

 

I'll be honest I think they offered sweet FA on C&B other than causing childish arguments. The debate on this thread backs it up....

 

All very valid points Ali.

The only issue is that you still haven’t explained why the picture of a turd replaces the ability to ‘like’, ‘dislike’, ‘agree’ and ‘disagree’ with something.

You say you used the ‘ratings’ to help you decide whether to read the post or not. I’m tempted to call you a sheep, but I’ll hold back on this occasion.

As you say, there are times where a simple ‘disagree’ will suffice. But I’d argue that if you are so against a post that you’d rate it with a turd, that should be explained. No?

 

Yet if there were ratings there'd have been a lot less of the "childish arguments" for you to read as many people would have simply responded with a quick agree or disagree.

 

There is a simple solution if ratings are introduced disable them and you don’t need to take part

 

Debating about something that isn't needed, the forum works fine as it is has done for over year..

 

Not needed 'in your opinion'. Clearly other posters would like to see it introduced, as proven in the vote.

Also, with the added option to disable ratings for those that prefer not to use them I really can't see the downside.

The argument of "it's fine as it is" also doesn't stand up. The site is constantly looking to improve user experience and has changed plenty since its introduction over a year ago. The latest change being only today with the introduction of the prediction league badges.