- 5 – Good
This is the basic “good comment” rating: A reasonably well written comment that is comprehensible, clear, and contributes to the discussion.
- 6 – Excellent
In addition to the qualities of a 5, a comment rated 6 brings in significant new information, or a new way of looking at the matter at hand. Significant new information could be a link to a very useful reference, witness accounts of an event that tell us more than we knew before, or subject-specific knowledge (such as from a lawyer about points of law). Or, the comment makes me rethink the issue, or brings out logical or philosophical connections I might not have thought of before reading it.
- 4 – Needs Work
A comment might “need work” because it is poorly written, misspelled, unclear, or sloppy. Or, because it is repeating something already said earlier in the thread without adding anything. Or, because it includes ad-hominem language or is unnecessarily blistery or insulting. Or, because it is a response that appears to misunderstand what it is responding to. For whatever reason, this comment could’ve been better.
- 3 – Worthless
A comment that I do not think contributes constructively to the discussion at all. This might be because of its content, but it might also be because it is too sloppily written, or just off topic.
- 0 – Delete
Usually, a troll. But I might give a 0 if I think a comment is completely off topic and, even though it may be a good comment, completely does not belong where it is.
Edit: If it made me laugh, it gets a higher rating.
What do y’all think?
How do you use the ratings we have available?
P.S. David, any chance of bringing back 1, 2, 7, 8, and 9?
I’d been using 6’s for zingers, or just agreement. I need to raise my standards again.
<
p>
Also, since the act of rating comments requires me to reload a page, I sometimes refrain from rating. It would be nice (though it might be expensive for the Editors) if ratings could be done as at TPMcafe.
I think the rating system needed to be clarified again because there seems to be some confusion. I agree that the rating system should not be used as a way to disagree with the commentator; that is what the “post a comment” or “reply” links are for.
at least, I think it should. I’ll give a 6 to what would be a 5 on your scale if it says what it says exceptionally well.
I favor reptillian ratings. The primal parts of our minds reduce a lot of stuff to “you like me”/”you hate me”. So it seems simple, natural, and human to use the ratings to express approval/warmth and disapproval/admonishment.
<
p>
From your post, Cos, you’re trying to raise the level of the debate. You yourself accomplish that by your well-thought out posts and comments, though, not through ratings. No one is going to be three-ed and four-ed into intelligent commentary.
<
p>
The difference between 5 and 6 is like grading papers. It strikes me as a bit arrogant even. (“Your comment was good but not great. B+.”)
Sometimes I use the ratings as an abbreviated way to say I’ve read a post. I want to say, “yes” and ratings are a super-terse way to do that. On a few occasions, someone has been brave enough to apologize, change an opinion, or state something difficult. I’ll give a six then, but generally, I reserve 6’s for comments I agree with.
<
p>
Further, I have a rule that I will never downrate a comment and reply to it simultaneously; I feel I should only express disapproval once. Even so I tend to limit downratings to posts that are in extremely poor taste or express socially harmful attitudes.
sometimes if I rate something a 0 or 3 after I’ve been in discussion with that poster, I also leave a comment as to why I’ve rated their comment low (or ask them why they rated me low). Seems only fair when in a “conversation”. But I don’t bother if it is just an odd bit of troll droll I slip on while scanning a dairy. I am definately using the rating system in 2 ways simultaneously – as a way to quickly acknowledge/agree/disagree with a comment when a verbal response would add nothing constructive or I’m in a hurry, and also as a “quality of the essay” rating.
Already I think that the 0, 3, 4, 5, 6 system gives us a wide enough range for ratings. A 0-9 system would lead to many many meta discussions (You gave me a 7?! I thought that comment was at least an 8!). That kind of ratings grubbing is in part what lead Daily Kos to switch to a binary reccomend/troll rate system.
<
p>
As long as people aren’t troll rating things that aren’t troll worthy, I’m not sure that there needs to be a standard meaning for the ratings. I tend to use 6’s for anything from “I was about to write the same exact thing, but you saved me the trouble” to “My, that was clever and witty, here’s a cookie”.
<
p>
Anyway, I rarely rate anything lower than a 6, except to troll rate or to offset an unfair troll rating.
<
p>
Do the ratings serve any purpose here other than to self-police troll posts?
Good/bad is pretty clear… and actually more informative than most other systems. If it gets a lot of “good” ratings, that means it’s probably a great comment. If it got just a few clicks of positive feedback, then that probably means it would be a 4/5 on this website.
<
p>
Plus, it helps nullify all the votes on this website that people get merely for the fact that they just don’t like you. There was one person a while back on this website who’d just give me 3s and 0s on replies that clearly weren’t worthy of a 3 and 0 (and would often come with lots of other votes of 5s and 6s).
<
p>
That said, I don’t really pay any attention to ratings when I’m reading posts. The only ratings I pay attention to are my own, in part because of vanity (=p) and in part because the few poor comments I’ve left are easily detectable and allow me the capacity to not repeat them in the future (although, I’ve had a few comments that I’d stick to even now, low ratings/high ratings/whatever).
A 6 is automatic for me — if I have to think about what to rate a comment, it’s going to be a 5.
<
p>
I don’t really give out a 4…seems like it’s a way of saying “yep, that comment sure is…there”.
<
p>
A 3, only if the writer needs to understand that what they’re writing isn’t contributing anything.
<
p>
A 0 if it seems the writer wouldn’t care about receiving a 3.
<
p>
I will say one thing about ratings, however — it gives a good idea of people with whom we agree or disagree, on style if not substance. I know of 3 or 4 folks here who, based on their ratings of me and my ratings of them, seem in sync.
<
p>
The bad thing is a wound of a 0 or 3 can take some time to scab over.
The other blog I spend much time on has turned off their rating system, and I have to say that it is a relief. While I do see teh value in using ratings, and I do use the system here at BMG, it is a real relief to not be facing a grade on each and every comment I make. And, if someone disagrees with what anyone else says, they actually have to express themselves in words. So I suspect that not having ratings may elevate the conversation more than if they were used. At leaast in some places.
i didn’t know that. uh, yeah..nevermind
I typically give sixes to anything rational, clear and something that I find contributes to the discussion (which means it isn’t completely rehashing and offers some reasoning). I’ll occasionally give a 5 if it isn’t quite up to those standards, but pretty close.
<
p>
3,4s go to comments I don’t think contribute.
<
p>
0s go to trolls, mean-spirited commments, etc.
Which probably isn’t much in MHO, I never use the comments rating system and almost never look at the results for the following reasons: (1) When I have consulted them, my general impression is that they reflect group-think; what I am usually most interested in are the outlying voices, because that is where I usually find items I didn’t know about before; (2) I find our current system incredibly un-intuitive and cumbersome to use, and the ratings themselves are sort of hard to see when one is scanning through a lot of posts; and (3) the subject lines and the posts themselves are usually more revealing than the ratings, so why bother with the latter.
Hey, I’ve got an idea:
<
p>
Click on something to say good point (other people should read it)
<
p>
Click on something else to flag offensive or spam/troll (no one should read it)
<
p>
Other things that are neither good points or offensive, just read without rating them
<
p>
Or mine? Without a better ratings system, I’m having a hard time being sure.
neither? i agreed with your comment, if that means anything.
<
p>
I do think that there are two seperate things that people rate though, and conflating them in one value makes it less meaningful. That might not have been my point before, I can’t remember. When I get a handle on it I’ll let you know.
<
p>
And this underscores that we do have the ability to comment on posts, not just rate them.
Apparently the five zeros the troll hunters bestowed on a comment in the 18+ post was enough to have it deleted. Little did I know we had this awesome power.
I give ‘im 0s. Every comment. That’s my new policy.
<
p>
It’s trolling, it’s nasty, it’s a jerk move. So, 0s from me until the sig gets changed.
<
p>
shrugs
Isn’t that the exact opposite of what Cos was getting at with using these ratings. It should NOT reflect weather you agree or disagree but rather the quality of the comment.
<
p>
Call them out on it, don’t try to get them deleted.
<
p>
I have a real problem with the deleting of comments based on user ratings. Seems like this could easily be abuse in the way that stomv is talking about and that seems more like censorship then feed back. I am often the contrary opinion on this blog and I could easily see my comments getting deleted on subjects like say Climate Change because people do not agree with my posting. I have gotten some attacks at me personally for opinions/positions I have expressed in a blog and could see that escalating into having my comments deleted. I am not accusing anyone of this, just saying I can see circumstances where this could be a problem.
I think that sig is a troll, which is what Cos says 0 should be used for. Now, sometimes that user may make a good point, which will keep me from a 0, maybe a 3 or 4. But that sig seriously detracts from any really good point that poster might make, and I think the penalty is appropriate.
1. It’s not censorship in the traditional sense, what with this being a private forum and whatnot. So, lose that argument right quick.
<
p>
2. It’s trolling and/or flamebait. He’s been told about it a number of times, and responded to the post pointing it out — so the person with Osama in his sig clearly knows its there. That he keeps it there indicates that he’s trolling. It’s not witty, it’s not insightful, it’s purely inflammatory.
<
p>
3. This has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with the rest of his comment — sometimes I do, sometimes I don’t. That’s why I always give the 0, so as to not reflect whether or not I agree.
<
p>
So, that’s my policy. I suspect if it were the policy of about 6 of the folks around here, he’d change his sig pretty dang quickly.