A proposal: lock any new post for five minutes before allowing the "U"

[question everything]

Not so much during the day, but in the evening, an wee hours of the morning, it appears that some threads get a "less than zero" within seconds of posting, and with less than 10 views. And these are mild posts about... the recession, or about California IOUs..

Thus, either, as someone recently posted, there are DUers who, as a matter of principle, just U every single new post. Or they are after individual members to U them at every turn.

Frankly, I think that if you don't like my post, you should have the courage to say why. Since when are DUers shy away from expressing their opinion?

Yesterday I read an "explanation" that a U means to prevent a thread from getting to the "greatest" page. This is ridiculous. I don't have the stats but what percentage of posts get there? 1%? 0.5% After all, a thread needs at least five Rs.

If you don't like a thread, why not let it sink? If you don't like a member, why not put him on "ignore?"

Of course, many Rs are given without explanation, also within a few seconds and also some DUers get them even if they just sneeze. But, as the DU rules spend a lot of time about not offending, talking, or calling out other DUer but nothing, of course, about a praise.

Last, if you really don't like the new system - myself included - why not search posts which do not offend you but with "less than 0" and recommend them to, at least, bring them to 0? I have recommended more posts in the past few days than I have in the past six months.

To repeat, preventing a U for the first five minutes, will mean that if you really dislike the thread, come back after five minutes and than hit the U.

OK, start Uing me.

[question everything]

1. Thank you for proving my point

too coward to say why?

[Occam Bandage]

4. How outrageously insecure must you be,

to post in impotent rage at the prospect of someone judging your thread as unsuitable for the "Greatest" page without giving you a full explanation for their grave offense?

[question everything]

19. Oh, thanks for the "analysis"

I used to mock the right wingers that they see the world in black and white. In terms of "Me Tarzan, You Jane." But now I see that such a view is alive and well on DU.

This is not an either "U" or "greatest page. We can have discussions without a single recommendation, or with only 1 or 2. But, yes, to have someone give a U without the balls to stand up and say why is cowardly that does not belong on DU.

[Occam Bandage]

2. Only if Rs are subject to the same rule.

I don't understand all these "oh, man, my thread got unrecced by someone, let's impose bizarre and arbitrary restrictions on unrecs."

DUers have never had restrictions on numbers of recs, on reasons for recs, on timeframes for recs, or on types of recs. I really do not understand the mindset that finds that acceptable, but finds the inverse functionality to be so outrageously offensive that DUers must be shielded from it.

[WI_DEM]

6. I agree. unrec doesn't supress anything. The thread is still there

you are giving people choices 1) to recommend what the poster says if you agree. 2) to unrecommend if you don't agree.

[Common Sense Party]

22. B-I-N-G-O.

[MineralMan]

3. It's over....the house lights have come up...you fell asleep...

Time to leave it alone.

[Sinistrous]

5. There is nothing in your beating of this dead horse that

makes it even a remote candidate for the "Greatest" page, and I will be doing my small part to hinder its getting there.

[Cronus Protagonist]

13. +U

:^D It seems to me that the people who write the most boring or irrelevant or uninteresting crapola are the ones whining about not being able to make it to the greatest page any more, which, to me, simply proves the new system is working. There is nothing in the OP that could possibly qualify the OP's whine for the greatest page, ergo, that is a place to which it will not go and all the whines in the world won't make up for a lack of interesting content.

[Occulus]

16. +100

I made that same point just the other day.

[question everything]

21. Why do you think that it is either "U" or "greatest"?

How many posts make it to the greatest? Why not just ignore a thread and let it sink?

Just because you, and apparently too many DUers are dreaming about "greatest" when they post does not mean that all of us do.

Most of us - I hope - post something to educate, to inform, to entertain, to gripe... if you and your buddies want only to rise to the greatest page than I feel even more sorry for you.

I have felt sorry for DUers who cannot fight with their bosses - if they work - or with their spouses - if they are married - so they come to the anonymity of the Internet to crap on others. But now, it appears, that all they want is the adoration of others; thumping on their chest; look at me, I am the greatest,

How sad. How pathetic.

[Sinistrous]

23. Delete

[question everything]

20. I've got news to you: the world is not "black and white"

A post can have 0 recommendations, or simply sink. Most posts do not make it to the greatest page. As I've stated, I doubt that even 0.1% of all posts make it. So why does it have to be either "greatest" or thumbs down? Why not simply leave it alone. Why the outrage to un-recommend a post that can otherwise simply sink? Why the passive aggressiveness to kick someone just for the hell of it? And do this anonymously?

Is this really what matters to you in life? To pass judgment on everything and everyone? Why not take a walk outside? Look around and see all the shades and, yes, nuances in the world?

Because seeing the world in black and white, as either "U" or "greatest" is really sad. I used to think that it was reserved for freepers. On the other hand, I've often thought that DU is the mirror image of the freepers.

[Sinistrous]

24. Physician, heal thyself.

[question everything]

25. Wow,, what an enlighted, thoughtful comment

full of insights and well reasoning. (not, in case you are missing the sarcasm)


:thumbsdown:

[snooper2]

7. Unrecommended

:rofl:

Oh, and by the way, is it that hard to type the complete word?

[cboy4]

8. What is this? A fricken trigonometry class or a discussion board?

[BlooInBloo]

9. (shrug) Do the same for rec, and I'm fine with it.

[reflection]

10. Please, just let it go...

Give people the personal freedom to rec or unrec based upon whatever criteria they see fit. Anything else is artificially skewing the truth. We don't need to be protected from ourselves.

On edit - no, I did not unrec this.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karynnj]

12. I unrecommended a thread - the reason was that it was dishonest

The op included statistics, that the poster knew were completely made up because he later admitted it. This led to a thread where no information was really conveyed. Because many recommended thinking it was true - I followed another poster's comment that he was unrecommending.

Do many people simply go to the greatest page? I know I look at the subject, not the # of recommends when reading - so, I don't get the damage done.

[question everything]

14. Can you recongize a question mark when you see one?

This is the "offending" sentence:

I don't have the stats but what percentage of posts get there? 1%? 0.5%

This is a question, not a statement. If you cannot recognize it for what it is - perhaps a remedial writing course?

[karynnj]

17. I did NOT unrecommend your thread, nor is that what I said

I referred to a blatantly dishonest thread where the op, in the thread, admitted he made up the numbers. (this is the thread - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6048536 )

Perhaps you need a remedial reading course or need to figure out why you took the comment as referring to you, when what you posted didn't remotely meet the description.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Let it go, it is done for

if you are so unhappy, I am serious, take a breather. This was TESTED over a year ago. And yes Du'ers requested it.

[Tesha]

18. I think the change that should be made is to make public each member's tally...

of recs versus unrecs. We might even discuss
whether it should be visible what *SPECIFIC* threads
they've rec'd and unrec'd.

I think we'd find out that it's a relatively small
pool of antisocial folks who've been gaming the
system in both directions.

Tesha

[Faux pas]

26. U-ing b/c the subject had gotten beyond tedious now, and there

is NO reason this thread should find it's self on the GP. There are so many threads that get there only b/c 'groupies' of certain posters rally round. I can always find the usual suspects in certain threads posted by the other usual suspects....mutual admiration for admiration sake kinda sucks and does skew the numbers in the minority's favor. I love that Majority Rules thingy that makes something Democratic.