The issue just won't die, huh? Here's another suggestion.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Guess there are more than a few "whiners" involved or these unrecommend threads would all sink like stones.

Here's a quick and easy compromise which both sides just might be able to agree upon. (I'm assuming it would be fairly quick and easy to implement)

Just about everyone (including me) LOVES the new feature which allows you to recommend a post without being redirected to another page, having to click "Yes, I really want to recommend this post" and then return to the article (or somewhere else on DU).

Let's keep that new feature, but ONLY for "recommend". If someone wants to unrecommend a thread, let's make it just a little more time-consuming. Bring back the re-direct page for that feature.

For me, I know that I would often hesitate before recommending a thread because I wasn't sure it was worth the trouble of the re-direct page. Let's make it just a little more time-consuming to unrecommend a thread, to make people pause and think for just that extra moment before using this grand new power.

Just a thought.

Edit: I only have two people on my "ignore list", and it's interesting to note that two of the first three responses to this thread were posted by those two people. What do you guys do, sit at your computers all day ready to pounce on any "unrec" thread? Seriously, get a life. :crazy:

Further edit - This poll doesn't quite give me enough info, so I made a second one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php

[BlooInBloo]

1. No, there are only a few whiners, making the same thread over and over...

And 'yes' votes should be treated identically with 'no' votes - the whole process.


EDIT: And you folks are unlikely to win by attrition, spam, or other techniques. Have fun trying, though.

[Posteritatis]

2. I stand by my suggestion - a small chance of the monitor exploding upon rec *or* unrec. (nt)

[TexasObserver]

3. No. You're penalizing those who want to Unrecommend. Bad idea.

Good to see you've changed your mind about the feature and now back it.

I recommend that you implement your system for yourself, by counting to ten each time you Unrecommend, in a silent homage to those who think Unrecommend is a bad idea.

[Texasgal]

4. I think this is much ado

about nothing.

:shrug:

[billyoc]

5. First rule of Whiner Club, don't stop talking about Whiner Club.

[TexasObserver]

11. hahahaha!

[Hydra]

6. You think that will slow people down?

I never hesitated to Rec a good post before this. I also don't hesitate to De-Rec a bad one.

Adding a step isn't going to stop me or anyone else.

[Occam Bandage]

7. Here's a great idea: let's all never start another goddamn unrec thread again. nt

[TexasObserver]

12. If ten are good, 100 would be transplendent!

[JVS]

8. Will you shut up about it yet?

[CTyankee]

9. I don't care. I dont rec or unrec and I don't "Ignore" (I simply ignore).

I want to spend my time on DU to browse and see stuff I need to know and to read some interesting interpretations of what is going on politically. I find DU endlessly fascinating and don't need shortcuts, or Greatest pages (I can figure that out for myself)or going to the trouble of putting anybody on an Ignore list (I'm not even sure how this is done but it would be a time waster to me).

I just think life is easier this way for me...

[masuki bance]

10. I automatically unrec all threads whining about unrecs. nt

[FlyingSquirrel]

14. You automatically consider any thread discussing the issue to be "whining"

Perhaps you just have a small mind. If so, at least you have plenty of company.

:rofl:

[CakeGrrl]

24. I just wonder why they're being created when the admins have decided to keep the feature

They saw all the arguments against it when it was first implemented, and decided to stick with it.

Nothing is being said that hasn't already been said. All these new 'ideas' revolve around somehow doing away with the feature or effectively nullifying it, so to what end?

[FlyingSquirrel]

30. Two parts

1.) You're saying that just because there are no new arguments being made, a subject should be closed? So, for example, if all possible arguments for adopting a single-payer healthcare system have been listened to, and the idea has been shit-canned, then we should all just shut up and not bring it up anymore? Your logic is flawed, the fact that a particular point of view does not win the day should not preclude its further discussion if those on the losing end still feel strongly about their position.

2.) My latest idea would not effectively nullify anything. People used the recommend function liberally even with the re-direct, therefore it must follow that people would still use the unrecommend function liberally if that re-direct was brought back for "unrec" only. The hope is that they would use it just a bit less liberally, that they might actually engage their brain for a moment before using it, and that this might allow a few items to get more press than otherwise would under the current system. Nothing would be "nullified" at all, this idea could be a win-win situation that might finally satisfy enough people to effectively end the debate.

[masuki bance]

27. Please add me to your ignore list. Thanks. nt

[FlyingSquirrel]

29. No, I prefer to make that decision on my own. Thanks.

[rucky]

13. Does sucking eggs happen before or after the dead horse is beaten?

[onehandle]

15. Skinner has closed this subject. nt

[FlyingSquirrel]

18. Please link to Skinner's post where he says we can no longer discuss it.

(IIRC he said it was fine to continue discussing it and they were not going to lock threads such as this, but instead let it "die down on its own" as part of the natural process.)

[onehandle]

19. I didn't say that.

But "die down on its own" tells me what he thinks about the whiners.

Notice that anyone who even brings the subject us gets unrec'ed automatically.

That tells me what the Vast majority thinks of people who even bring it up.

[FlyingSquirrel]

21. Oh, wow. You can read minds!

Perhaps instead he was just making an assumption that the issue WOULD die down. What happens if the issue DOESN'T die down?

Not that I plan to keep bringing it up myself. But if in fact there are still a lot of people discussing it in a few months, this might cause the admins to re-examine the issue.

After all, some people actually don't assume that they are absolutely 100% right all the time. Some people are wise enough to be willing to re-think their positions and make adjustments. I know that sounds crazy.

[onehandle]

25. Again, these threads sink quick.

Maybe there will be an Unrec Thread Dungeon down the road.

Fine by me. This is a politics forum for the most part. Not the "Wahhh! I can't get my way on the functionality of forum!" forum.

[Hepburn]

16. LOL...you and I have at least one of the same people on IGNORE!

GMTA...:hi:

[DireStrike]

17. Meh. I want an ungreatest page and total unrecs shown

That way we can see threads that people just DONT LIKE. Kinda like a banned books section.

[crickets]

20. Good way of putting it.

I'd love to see unrec scrapped altogether, but if it's here to stay it would be nice to at least see both totals.

[havocmom]

22. You want a soda with yer egg salad?

[TexasObserver]

23. I'm honored to have a 2/3 probability of being on your ignore list.

I'd like to thank the academy ....

[Stevenmarc]

26. The unrec issue will die, Susan Boyle will be on the next America's got Talent

[Life Long Dem]

28. I hide all of them without even reading them.

:evilgrin: