Distinguished Road?

For those worried about the rating system and such, I don't think you have much to worry about.

I have deliberately posted pretty "anti-labor" sentiments in one thread which was even named for me, and posted a blatently inflammatory article about Islam in another thread. I got a "negative" because one guy didn't like the article, got a couple of "positives" from the labor thread - but the point is that all in all people generally are fair-minded here and will not "Zap" you just because they disagree with what you say - which I believe was the intent - not to force agreement but to glorify, or criticize, poor posting behavior (rudeness/meanness, etc). I couldn't have taken two more unpopular stances here and there was no retribution - meaning that JC is pretty fair minded.
 
darrenf said:
That conclusion is the only possibility you see?
Click to expand...

No, but it's a reasonable assumption I think. I have staked out positions that differ from the vast majority of JC and they have not used the rating system as a weapon. It would seem that most are not judging because of simple disagreement to an idea. Now, I would bet it would be different if I stated "Jtrain is a tool and I hate him" or something along that line - and it would be deservedly so - but since I don't do that (and don't feel that way) and I don't personally attack people that JC can fairly accept alternative views without killing the messenger of those views. I am an optimist though and I look for reasons to celebrate the people on JC so I think it reflects well. I was just trying to address some of the skepticism that some felt would occur.
 
WacoFan said:
No, but it's a reasonable assumption I think. I have staked out positions that differ from the vast majority of JC and they have not used the rating system as a weapon. It would seem that most are not judging because of simple disagreement to an idea. Now, I would bet it would be different if I stated "Jtrain is a tool and I hate him" or something along that line - and it would be deservedly so - but since I don't do that (and don't feel that way) and I don't personally attack people that JC can fairly accept alternative views without killing the messenger of those views. I am an optimist though and I look for reasons to celebrate the people on JC so I think it reflects well. I was just trying to address some of the skepticism that some felt would occur.
Click to expand...

So you don't think this is a slide towards self-moderation? Would that not incur the same pitfalls as a direct democracy with everything being up to a popular vote?
 
scooter2525 said:
I'm sure you have noticed, but he will drop by occasionally and stir the pot.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if his "much ado about nothing" experiment is yielding the expected results. This is sort of a 'Black Swan' sort of thing- it's a thread full of opinions about other peoples' opinions. Call it a microcosm of the greater gnash-cluster that is often JC. Call me a sucker, I suppose- I do have a thing for social science and psychology. Either way, I think the only thing this experiment has proven is that people worry too much about the opinions of others. My only beef is the possibility that this lends any credibility to the practice.

Alas... that's only.. my opinion. ;)
 
WacoFan said:
For those worried about the rating system and such, I don't think you have much to worry about.

I have deliberately posted pretty "anti-labor" sentiments in one thread which was even named for me, and posted a blatently inflammatory article about Islam in another thread. I got a "negative" because one guy didn't like the article, got a couple of "positives" from the labor thread - but the point is that all in all people generally are fair-minded here and will not "Zap" you just because they disagree with what you say - which I believe was the intent - not to force agreement but to glorify, or criticize, poor posting behavior (rudeness/meanness, etc). I couldn't have taken two more unpopular stances here and there was no retribution - meaning that JC is pretty fair minded.
Click to expand...

Since I'm pretty sure that I'm one of the people that you're addressing, I'll try to more clearly state my reason for being against this system.

Based off of what Kristie wrote, I think that she (and Doug, too, probably) wants the reputation system to be a way for other users to be able to identify the more knowledgeable and valuable users because they would probably be the most helpful. According to this, the higher ratings would correlate to more "strength and value."

Let's use one aspect of the reputation system as an example for this aviation Web site:

Here is a small sample of some of the most knowledgeable and valuable members on JetCareers: My Flight Surgeon (Senior Aviation Medical Examiner), seagull (FedEx MD-11 Captain), CaptBill (Captain at a Legacy), staplegun (Delta Air Lines Captain with over 15,000 flight hours), DE727UPS (UPS 767 Captain), MDPilot (Delta Air Lines and retired military pilot with over 15,000 flight hours), and fo4ever (Delta Air Lines Pilot).

With the aforementioned users in mind, you'll notice that they are all "unrated" (fo4ever is even "trending negative"), while you, a two-hundred-hour private pilot, are "rated positive" with two bars. fo4ever is a pilot at one of the largest airlines in the world, yet he has a significantly lower rating than you do. I'm not saying that you're not a knowledgeable or valuable member, but this is an aviation Web site, and he is an airline pilot, and you are a private pilot.

Based off of this, when it comes to flying (a big topic on an aviation Web site), I'll say that there is a very small chance that a private pilot is more knowledgeable than an airline pilot, yet the ratings would indicate otherwise (as per their intent).

This is just one example of why I think that the intended purpose of the reputation system will not work on this site. As you've previously mentioned in this thread, the ratings are "for fun." If that's the case, then so be it. If users are looking for what Kristie intended, then I think that they will be disappointed.

It is, however, important to keep in mind that Kristie never specified what the users should be knowledgeable in. It can be assumed that it must be something related to aviation, given that this is an aviation Web site. I'm just trying to picture what a new user would be thinking when they show up and see all of the green bars under someone's user name. In the end, you're probably right; it's just a popularity contest....
 
coa787 said:
This is just one example of why I think that the intended purpose of the reputation system will not work on this site.
Click to expand...

So, you're suggesting that it would be better to just put our hours/years/types of experience over there under our user names?
 
COA, many of the ratings are based off of Lav posts, which have nothing to do with one's background/hours/experience/value to the site anyway. Hence many of the disparities.
 
coa787 said:
With the aforementioned users in mind, you'll notice that they are all "unrated" (fo4ever is even "trending negative"), while you, a two-hundred-hour private pilot, are "rated positive" with two bars. fo4ever is a pilot at one of the largest airlines in the world, yet he has a significantly lower rating than you do. I'm not saying that you're not a knowledgeable or valuable member, but this is an aviation Web site, and he is an airline pilot, and you are a private pilot.
Click to expand...

Yo dweeb! I may be a two-hundred hour private pilot - but I've got Waco and Howard time! Plus two popularity bars!!!1!

Suck on that bitchez! I'm forever!

lambertwacofan.jpg



In all seriousness - I get what you are saying here. I would submit though - if you can't discriminate who knows something about flying/airplanes/etc without looking at the green bars - then that may indicate a problem. When any of the people you mention "speak" it shouldn't take very long to figure out they know what they're talking about. Sometimes common sense must come into play - and that is actually ok - can you imagine the beatdown that would occur if I started a serious debate with CalCapt about the operation of an airliner? Even with my Waco and Howard time I'd be brutalized for that and deservedly so - and that beatdown would be valuable to watch (witness the threads in which Aloft self-destructed by ragging on CK and then saying Doug was an affirmative-action hire: didn't do much to save Aloft, but the beatdown was instructive to other members on how "not" to network). What if two people - say De727UPS and T-cart got into a debate about Ag-flying? T-cart kind of wins that "knowledgeable" title on that one since he's at 20,000+ hours 3 feet above the crops - but both members of the debate would be "highly rated due to experience" - so at some point personal discrimination, and not the rating system are what is key.
 
Hacker15e said:
So, you're suggesting that it would be better to just put our hours/years/types of experience over there under our user names?
Click to expand...

Yes, because as we all know, you can't possibly be a horrible pilot or unpleasant person if you have 15,000+ hours, a shiny uniform, and a mailbox that says "CAPTAIN". :sarcasm:
 
MikeD said:
COA, many of the ratings are based off of Lav posts, which have nothing to do with one's background/hours/experience/value to the site anyway. Hence many of the disparities.
Click to expand...

WacoFan said:
so at some point personal discrimination, and not the rating system are what is key.
Click to expand...

Ah, gotcha. I guess it is safe to say that the real purpose of the system, then, must be to alter the way that a user conducts themselves. My logic for this stems from the fact that the Mods and Admins have the ability to disable their reputations, but the users do not. If I had three red bars, right now, that should probably make me sit back and think, "Huh, maybe I should stop being an ass to everyone." I see, so it really is a user-be-good stick. :)
 
coa787 said:
Ah, gotcha. I guess it is safe to say that the real purpose of the system, then, must be to alter the way that a user conducts themselves. My logic for this stems from the fact that the Mods and Admins have the ability to disable their reputations, but the users do not. If I had three red bars, right now, that should probably make me sit back and think, "Huh, maybe I should stop being an ass to everyone." I see, so it really is a user-be-good stick. :)
Click to expand...

I still get rated. It's a point of pride for me to have 4 red bars.
 
I am tired of being awesome, everyone please vote me negative. I nominate myself to be Wacos Antichrist, the ying to his yang, the jeter to his A-rod.

Funny aside, when I typed in jeter my iPhone autocorrected it to homosexual. Now that's some funny stuff!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top