Can we introduce a system where members can mark a post as negative or not liked. I understand the negative rep system from before was being mistreated but there seems to be a lot of post where the information given was not helpful or could cause problems for the OP. Most of them have been dealing with issues like algae where the answer is just add a Siamese algae eater, pleco, some other animal or post dealing with diseases where the easy answer for treating ich is just add salt even if the OP has scaleless fish or other meds for diseases that could affect other fish in the tank. Thank you
We already have a less confrontational way to dispute information or offer alternative suggestions. It's called the "reply with quote" button. One of the best things about this forum is that you can't anonymously ding people. I feel that nothing good can possibly come from this.
I have to agree with Adam, the whole point of a forum is open discussion offering different views, you may not always agree with them & have the option to say so using the reply with quote button.
I agree that anything along these lines should not be anonymous but it could be as simple as adding a dislike button next to the like button and Like the like buton it can also show the users name. I think that a way to show that people dont agree or like the advise posted would improve the forum. Ive seen it many times in other forums where someone doesn't like or agree with someone and its became a flame war with the OP forgotten in the process. Personally i don't like the fact that rep can be give anonymously I believe members should be able to check why members have a high or low rep. A high rep for all anyone knows might be because someone said oh what a pretty fishy to a pic.
I am with Coradee and Adam, this would certainly end badly with abuse and wrongfully "Disliking" someone's post, just because two people disagree. This could certainly give great members what looks to be a reputation for giving bad advice, but they were simply expressing their opinion. It could also definitely lead to arguments over, "Why would you "dislike" that post?!" and things like that. Besides, like coradee and Adam said, if you disagree, just say so. I hate to bash anyone's ideas, but sorry, this would definitely end badly.
I also agree with Adam. It is easy to misconstrue the meaning of a post, or the author fails to clearly put forth a point. Forcing you to reply to their post allows them to reply to clarify their post. You ever try to write sarcasm into a post? The meaning frequently gets lost.
I think with the information available on this website that the original poster can check and recheck the information given against what ha already been posted. I have a lot of questions but rarely post them because i find that they are already answered using the search button. If I asked "will it hurt if i jump off my house?" And someone replys "no" wouldn't that be my fault for not checking the hundreds of previous posts that say if i jump off my house i will get seriously hurt. People need to be responsible and give good information but people also need to take responsibility of the situation and use more than one persons advice to make a decision. Sent from my iPhone using Fish Lore Aquarium Fish Forum
The thing is that the whole argument can be used against the current give rep a like system, We have one why not the other. Yes people might abuse it but people might abuse the current system too. While i don't agree with censorship in any for and don't believe that fishlore shouldn't censor anyone's post in any form but they do. However saying that I also agree that this is a family orientated forum and cursive or hostile language should not be allowed but a better policy in my opinion would be a, to use an american term, 3 strikes and your out policy. Allowing someone to like a post but not dislike the same one or to give positive rep but not negative rep is the same and seems arbitrary to me.
I suppose I am agreeing with Smee on some level. There is no balance. I believe the positive rep has been misused more so that the neg reps ever were yet no one ever complained they got a positive rep where is really wasn't deserved (example 'Nice Fish') That's not to say i think we should get rid of it but it comes back to balance.
I just see it as a novelty rather than a tool. TBH I haven't even noticed to look at people's rep for I don't know how long until this topic was brought up.
I believe we should bring back the negative rep system in some form. There has been an explosion of new members in recent months. Most of these folks are new to the hobby and are seeking help. Some of these new members are inexperienced but vocal, and they give wrong advice. If a member gives wrong advice and no one with a better level of knowledge comes along to correct it, the OP could be in trouble. Unless there is something to indicate that the information may be suspect, how will a newbie be able to discern valid information? When I saw a light red square, it caused me to check why the poster had negative rep. I could then decide for myself if I wanted to trust the information. Also, with so many new members, I bet the faithful moderators of FishLore are being stretched a bit thin. A negative rep point given to a post could serve as a helpful alert to a moderator, who could step in before the thread degenerates into disputes. To help police the giving of negative rep, it could be restricted to members with at least 100 posts (not 50). That way, there would be some level of confidence that the member flagging a post has the experience to discern the quality of information. What's more, a member with at least 100 posts would not be flagging posts out of spite (hopefully). At any rate, those are my two cents. Thank you for reading!
I agree with both smee and Lucy, but the negative or dislike rep system will only work if used properly. Here's a scenario of this system being manipulated and miss used: Member A received negative rep from Member B because of bad advice given. Member A out of spite and vengeance teams up with friend members C, D, F, G and now all go after Member B and post negative rep or discredit that members information based on emotion and vengeance rather then merit. Unfortunately, this can become too common of a scenario. Though directly challenging someone's advice can start a spirited debate, it also allows for other members to either support, or discredit someone's opinion or advice respectfully. In the end, a consensus is formed and best answer determined.
Unfortunately, people sometimes post bad advice. I think it is far better to offer correct advice (after bad advice) & let the person with the question decide. They should know to check out other comments which follow both posts & to check out which advice received "likes" or +1 or =2 to "johns advice". Perhaps there could be a beginner suggestion to help them determine good-bad-ugly☺ People love to get approval/likes but few I know would feel good about a dislike. I have seen several of the Moderators & many seasoned members gently correct someone. True - I have also seen people get snarky when someone is trying to help them...I have read some great comebacks☺
Considering all of the options, a thumbs up/thumbs down system might be better than the rep system we have. Yes, what Riv stated will happen. People won't like what someone said and will flip out and attack them. This has happened to me on several forums, including this one (I come on a bit strong at times xD especially when people can't hear my silly tones haha). But it's a lot easier to simply click a thumbs up button than it is to go into the rep system and leave a nice comment. I would think, given my experience on forums that have this system, that informative posts with good information would get more thumbs up than thumbs down, regardless of someone potentially being on a rampage that day. Anyway, just my two cents.
Such a situation does happen, unfortunately. Fortunately, it has not happened very often on FishLore, except recently I've noticed with the influx of new members. In that case, a negative rep (or let's call it a "red flag") would alert a moderator. Any red flag would alert a moderator. The mod on duty would respond as appropriate, and will also be alerted if Members A, C, D and G gang up on Member B. In which case those members are breaking forum rules and are subject to getting the boot. As an aside, I was a member of FishLore before the "likes" were implemented. Back then we only had positive or negative rep. IMO, it has reduced the amount of positive rep given. It's far, far easier to click "like" than it is to give someone positive rep. Thank you again for reading my post. If you like, just click on the button in the lower right corner....
Hi everyone, I think we're all getting a little over sensitive. The first comment I'll make is that there is no such thing as "wrong advice". By definition, advice is "an opinion or recommendation offered as a guide to action, conduct, etc." (dictionary.com) Everyday, in my job, I offer and am presented with advice on the topics of my job.... Advice given, and received, is always presented based on the experience and knowledge a person has. "Don't go sailing off into the horizon, you'll fall off the end world" - at the time, based on the knowledge, the advice was accurate. As we grow our knowledge, we learn new things, and experience new things, and the advice we give changes. Heck, there was a period of time, where I would advise the use of pH up and down to 'fix' pH 'problems'. As my knowledge of the hobby grew, I learnt that there's generally no need to alter pH. The example above, controlling algae with SAE - is that necessarily inaccurate or wrong? No, not necessarily, assuming the algae is an algae the SAE will eat, and the tank is big enough. Are there other options, of course, and in the case of algaes, my advice is to always address the cause of the algae, rather than using a SAE or snails to 'control' it. Which approach is right, which is wrong? Neither, they are two different approaches, and both would probably work. For the record Donner, the moderators are not on duty so to speak (that is, we're not shift workers :giggle - We volunteer our time to Fishlore, and do our best to maintain a level of discussion that stays within the rules. If any member feels they are hardly done by, they can report the issue, and the moderators will address (that's what the report button is for, to alert mod's of an issue). Oh, it was mentioned above....we will never censor a person. We may edit inappropriate posts, or posts that break the rules, but we will not censor people. Edit: The following links may be of interest: https://www.fishlore.com/fishforum/...estions/32412-reminder-reputation-system.html https://www.fishlore.com/fishforum/...estions/166421-reminder-using-rep-system.html and most importantly: https://www.fishlore.com/fishforum/...67022-removing-option-leave-negative-rep.html Edit 2: Thinking about this topic some more.... I think the biggest issue I had with the negative reputation, was that it detracted from the purpose of the forum, and made newer, less experienced members feel unwelcome. 'Experienced' fish keepers were quick to give negative reputation, rather than help a new member grow their knowledge. Rather than help, the new member was made to feel inadequate and intimidated, when all they are trying to do is contribute to the forum, and learn more about the hobby. https://www.fishlore.com/fishforum/...sing-fishlore-reminder-our-creed-purpose.html
Hi Ryan, Thanks for your post up. Just to clarify, I was referring to an earlier post where, in a hypothetical system, the mods "on duty" could benefit from an alert generated by negative rep or red flag. Anyway, "nuff said" by me. Thanks for letting me put my six cents in!
I don't think there should be a rep system at all. I don't like any of the squares whatever color they end up being. In my opinion, I've given some good posts and never received good rep for them. It just seems silly to me. If there is a rep system, I think only moderators should be allowed to give rep, period.
