I hereby petition for the return of -1s

[NUance]

Having the ability to give a +1 but not a -1 is like an every-kid-gets-a-ribbon kindergarten track meet. When someone says something really, really stupid they should receive feedback. Negative feedback. Think of it as an educational thing.

In some instances a -1 is a better tool for feedback than posting a response to a really, really stupid post. There are times when a comment is just so stupid that people don't want to respond so as not to direct the conversation in that direction.

I'm not suggesting that we get as many negs as we do +1s (ten per day). But rather, a lower limit of, say, two -1s per day might be appropriate.

What about it? Would I receive a -1 for this idea?

 

[knapplc]

A brief history of our discussions about Rep points over the years:

When Rep Points came into existence with the 1/2010 Board Upgrade:

New Board Suggestions & Reputation & Giving Reputation

Discussions on Negative Rep:

Suggestion for MODS about Reputation

Lame Question About Posters Reputation

The last two explain why negative rep went away. I would not anticipate its return.

 

[Excel]

I could see it driving away new members.

 

[True2tRA]

I could see it driving away new members.

-1

 

[husker B-rent]

Agreed op. Only positive feedback is for sissies and mamby pambys.

Can't stand getting you feewings hurt....then don't post stupid crap!

 

[Mavric]

 

[Excel]

I am against the reintroduction of downvoting for three reasons:

1. It is likely to intimidate new posters or non-regulars and discourage them from posting.

2. It has a huge potential for abuse. If one poster doesn't like another they can easily query their post history and -1 them to oblivion. What are the parameters for its use? I don't like you? I don't like your opinion? What? We shouldn't be punishing other posters just because we disagree and anything else is just a popularity contest.

3. It will stifle discussion. The way HB is set up now, if you disagree with someone's post and want that known you have to reply and articulate your opposing viewpoint or at worst call them out in the shed. People will just down vote instead of engaging so in that way -1ing provides a low-value means of disagreeing that does absolutely nothing to foster discussion which is, you know, kind of the purpose of HB.

For these same reasons, I'd be completely fine with ditching +1'ing as well. It really doesn't bring much to the board.

I think the whole "Yea bring back -1'ing you cowards, deal with it if you suck" attitude is asinine. If you disagree with someone then respond and explain why. This is a message board after all. If anyone is weak and cowardly in that situation it's the people that would resort to simple -1's.

 

[NUance]

I think the whole "Yea bring back -1'ing you cowards, deal with it if you suck" attitude is asinine. If you disagree with someone then respond and explain why. This is a message board after all. If anyone is weak and cowardly in that situation it's the people that would resort to simple -1's.

The problem is, sometimes responding to a particularly stupid post just pushes the conversation in that direction. A neg rep would allow feedback without furthering a stupid line of thought.

 

[husker B-rent]

Plus it works just fine everywhere else!

 

[knapplc]

I am against the reintroduction of downvoting for three reasons:

1. It is likely to intimidate new posters or non-regulars and discourage them from posting.

2. It has a huge potential for abuse. If one poster doesn't like another they can easily query their post history and -1 them to oblivion. What are the parameters for its use? I don't like you? I don't like your opinion? What? We shouldn't be punishing other posters just because we disagree and anything else is just a popularity contest.

3. It will stifle discussion. The way HB is set up now, if you disagree with someone's post and want that known you have to reply and articulate your opposing viewpoint or at worst call them out in the shed. People will just down vote instead of engaging so in that way -1ing provides a low-value means of disagreeing that does absolutely nothing to foster discussion which is, you know, kind of the purpose of HB.

For these same reasons, I'd be completely fine with ditching +1'ing as well. It really doesn't bring much to the board.

I think the whole "Yea bring back -1'ing you cowards, deal with it if you suck" attitude is asinine. If you disagree with someone then respond and explain why. This is a message board after all. If anyone is weak and cowardly in that situation it's the people that would resort to simple -1's.

This is pretty much exactly why -1s will not be coming back. Very well put, Bucky.

 

[PaulCrewe]

I for one would use all my -1 on Bucky

 

[Minnesota_husker]

Who was the member who was a ginger from Montana who had like a -100 rep?

I think if it isnt abused to be funny, it can be a good tool to show people that they are stupid and shouldnt post anymore.... or something like that.

 

[Excel]

I for one would use all my -1 on Bucky

Which is a personal reason I have against their reintroduction. You and a few other people follow me around flaming me enough as it is. -1ing would just be that much more petty and annoying,

 

[husker_99]

Who was the member who was a ginger from Montana who had like a -100 rep?

I think if it isnt abused to be funny, it can be a good tool to show people that they are stupid and shouldnt post anymore.... or something like that.

yeah good luck with that. all tools are double-edged. great good or great evil. so are you saying only certain people should post? If some people don't like a certain poster they should decide whether or not he posts? what happened to just using the ignore function?