ninjuice: The Approval System Needs To Change

ninjuice 01.01.10	In theory, the approval system should work fine. If you think the review is bad, you vote so and hopefully explain so in a comment. Most of the people that comment "good review" don't usually bother to pos it, but that's not a huge problem. But of course, it gets abused like mad. Write a controversial review, and you get a multitude of negs, and while some of them are because people think it's bad a majority will probably be because they disagree. In addition, there's trolls/users who neg someone's reviews cause they're a troll or have a grudge. I even admit to being guilty of the first sometimes, and so I think the system needs to change. Electric City's idea of just removing negs sounds really good. If someone thinks the review is good, they pos it. Instead of approval, we either have a ratio of pos's to reviews or average number of them per review. Review can display a ratio of comments to positive votes, and so a bad review that gets a lot of comments should have a weak ratio. This isn't perfect either - you have sort of the same problem with controversial reviews - but it seems better than the current system. Maybe it's a terrible idea I dunno. I just know of the dozen or so negs I've gotten, only two or three came with a comment, and those people were just pissed about a negative review.
Electric City 01.01.10	my idea is actually do away with the voting system altogether because it causes way too much butthurt feelings when if someone feels strongly enough to say a review is good or bad, they should just say so and not just click and be on their merry way.
ninjuice 01.01.10	That might work to.
FadeToBlack 01.01.10	Doing away with it all together is probably for the best
BrahTheSunGod 01.01.10	Or if nothing else, hold people accountable by posting thier pos's or neg's in the comments thread for everyone to see.
ninjuice 01.01.10	Idk about that. Requiring comments for a neg makes more sense - if you can't think of a good reason why you're doing it, don't do it.
TheEnforcer 01.01.10	There seems to be no logical way to deal with the problems, by removing negs all together I'm sure users would seem less accomplished.
Zizzer 01.01.10	I like that last idea the best. Make a comment necessary for a neg review. Also, I just noticed this, but what happened to the mp3 links on the sides of band pages?
Metalstyles 01.01.10	TheEnforcer is right, but on the other hand, so are everyone else citing that the current system is flawed. Imo whichever way you look at it, it's a lose-lose situation. There will always be unhappy people who do not approve of the system in use, doesn't really matter which route will be selected.
Foxhound 01.01.10	There should be a box where you can pos or neg but your name shows up and you have to explain your criticism.
somberlain 01.01.10	"Or if nothing else, hold people accountable by posting thier pos's or neg's in the comments thread for everyone to see" except that people will neg the person who neg'd them just to get back at them, that might not be a good idea. requiring a comment for a neg is probably the best idea
SeaAnemone 01.01.10	or combine the two- I like the idea of having to leave a comment but keeping it anonymous
Metalstyles 01.01.10	@StatikAndroid the idea itself is almost great, i once presented such an option myself, but it has one major flaw - one can simply type I didn't like the revue; I hated the rating etc into it. You can't make the system "ask" for a rational solution. And so, the addition of a neg/pos comment and reasoning box would be futile
SeaAnemone 01.01.10	^well, I know the mods hate more work, understandably, but couldn't they remove the neg if they see the reason inane or unfit, or would that be too much power for them?
ninjuice 01.01.10	"except that people will neg the person who neg'd them just to get back at them, that might not be a good idea." But then they'd know as well, and the mods could sort it out.
Prophet178 01.01.10	Getting rid of negs seems like a good idea. People that neg for a viable reason usually leave a comment anyway. Requiring a comment would still attract troll negs; they're trolls, they would leave a comment like "gay review" and still neg. Taking away the system all together wouldn't be a good idea. How would one review top another review as the main one? I guess the staff could decide, but then people would get even more butthurt and it would give the staff even more to keep up with. By leaving in the pos system the users can still feel good about themselves when they write a good review, and their review will get recognized for being very well written.
somberlain 01.01.10	@ SeaAnemone that's too much power I say require a comment fo a neg though the comment may be "good review" so you would have to guess who did it
ninjuice 01.01.10	"I say require a comment fo a neg though the comment may be "good review" so you would have to guess who did it" True. Most of the ones I get are long after it's off the front page though, so it'd be obvious.
Metalstyles 01.01.10	ninjuice's reasoning is actually very good, I guess it's just behind whether or not mods would be willing to do even more work (understandably, they wouldn't be flattered about it). Also, people go into the "meds" thread in the forums anyway, so mods have to deal with the voting crap anyway, so it all sounds pretty rational for me: place a box for neg votes, that requires an explanation, and if the explanation isn't good enough/is stupid, one can just ask a mod to remove the neg
somberlain 01.01.10	@ ninjuice "Most of the people that comment "good review" don't usually bother to pos it" that is so annoying I hate when you see 4 or 5 comments that are "good review" but only 1 pos
somberlain 01.01.10	thanx for raining on our parade chan
ninjuice 01.02.10	You are wrong. Everything on Sputnik is 100% serious and affects your personal life.
Bandido 01.03.10	No opinion on the approval system but you've got a bunch of my favorite albums here so awesome list!