UNREC spawns a lot more threads.

[Laelth]

Don't know if you've noticed (I bet the admins have), the unrec feature seems to spawn a lot of threads. There are always going to be dupes on DU. That is to be expected. But with the unrec feature, an extremely popular topic (like the addition of the unrec feature itself) seems to create a lot more threads. When these extremely popular topics came along in the past, a lot of people would simply add their two cents to the thread on the Greatest Page rather than starting another, new thread. Now, people are starting thread after thread after thread making the same argument that then drops off the front page off GD in a heartbeat because it gets unrec'd. So, it seems, they create another one to get their idea back in front of the crowd.

Just an observation, and I lack the data to confirm it. If I am right, though, wouldn't it be better to have fewer and busier threads?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[liberal N proud]

1. More than Michael Jackson?

[Laelth]

3. I think so.

Again, I don't have the data, but the number of similar threads about the unrec function is astounding.

Don't you think?

:dem:

-Laelth

[Phentex]

16. I wish there were stats comparing the number of threads whining

about the MJ threads vs. those regarding the unrec feature.

I am enjoying the hundreds so far!

[Laelth]

23. I admit it.

I enjoyed all the MJ threads, but it seemed like each one added something different.

All the unrec threads strike me as spam (and, perhaps, this thread is no different). ;)

Thanks for the response.

:dem:

-Laelth

[liberal N proud]

49. I have come close to taking the same evasive actions with the rec threads

HIDING THEM.

[BlooInBloo]

2. If you don't count unrec threads, I hadn't noticed.

[Laelth]

5. I can't help it. I often scan GD top to bottom.

There are a lot of threads on there.

Because I often agree with people in the minority, I have to read them all now. I can't trust the number of recs to tell me whether an interesting idea has been posted or not.

But, to the point. Do you think your/our idea for a "Hottest Topics" page would fix this (if I am right)?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

11. The "hottest topics" are already automatically at the top of each discussion section

Because the most recently-replied to threads are near the top.


If you want to know what is "hot"... look at the first page of GD. Regardless of the rec totals, the "hottest" will be there.

[Laelth]

15. I do, as I said to another poster, often look at GD's first page.

But what's wrong with having a "Hottest Topics" page that ranks them as well?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

18. Nothing, I guess... just seems redundant

Since the hottest are already at the top of their discussion section.


Got no problem with it... just don't see the point.

[dionysus]

12. why not just not have a greatest page? i don't even look at the damn thing.

[Laelth]

19. The top 5 threads on it appear on DU's home page.

That makes the top 5 visible to a very wide audience. DU gets a good bit of traffic.

If those threads were not there (presuming we had no Greatest Page), what would you want to put there instead?

:dem:

-Laelth

[dionysus]

21. didn't think of that, i go to du and right into the forums.

[Laelth]

24. Me too.

But your causal visitor, one who's looking at DU from the outside, sees the home page first, I'd bet, 9 times out of 10. The home page is the image we project to the world.

:dem:

-Laelth

[BlooInBloo]

14. I don't think it's a bad idea. I think it's an idea completely independent of the rec/unrec issue.

[Laelth]

26. Well, I wouldn't say "independent."

In fact, it's the unrec that makes the "Hottest Page" necessary. Without the unrec feature, I can use the Greatest Page as I always did.

That's my 2 cents, in any event.

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

4. GETTING UNREC'D DOES NOT DROP YOU OFF THE FRONT PAGE OF GD

God, some people are so dense.

The rec/unrec score has NOTHING to do with where a thread is in GD, or GDP, or any other forum.

The most recently REPLIED-TO threads are near the top.


Hence... that is why so many "<0" threads, including many started more than 24 hours ago, are still at the top of GD.

[Laelth]

13. No need to scream.

Nor is there any need to be rude. I understand, well enough, how the mechanics of the system work.

Note that a poster above says he's not opening threads with negative recs. That means he's not responding to them either. Lack of responses will cause a thread to drop off the first page of GD soon enough. Looks like the unrec function will cause this to happen to some threads.

No? :shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

20. Except that 4 of the top 5 threads currently on GD are rated '<0'

...so your premise fails the real-world test.

[Laelth]

25. Wow. You're right.

Strange. Do you believe that will continue to be the trend ... that the most popular threads will have <0 recs? If so, what does that say?

Interesting.

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

31. That controversy breeds discussion

Doesn't mean that controversy should mean "Greatest Page".

[Laelth]

34. I agree.

Which is why I support a "Hottest" Page. I am rather fond of "discussion" on a discussion board.

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

35. Like I said.. I don't disagree with the concept....

...I just think it is redundant.

The "Hottest page" is effectively the first page of each discussion section.

[Laelth]

39. I hear you, and I agree with a caveat.

The front page of each section is a combination of both the hottest and the newest (and, usually, the new outnumber the hot).

I think it would be nice to have the newest threads weeded out.

:dem:

-Laelth

[scheming daemons]

43. Good point.

You've moved me toward full support of "hottest page".

[Laelth]

61. Update.

Take a look now. The unrec'd threads are falling quickly into oblivion, as I predicted.

Just an observation.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Ignis]

48. Try decaf. (nt)

[PretzelWarrior]

6. the ones that are compelling will be busier.

it should be obvious. And yet....you never know. Way back when I started a thread saying Charlie Chan movies were crude stereotypes and very politically incorrect (I think because FauxNews had commercials for them). That one got like 150 replies or so. It was crazy. Also, it wasn't recommended to the greatest page which was fine by me.

Then there are the ones I struggled over, wrote and rewrote that sank immediately.

That's life. You never know how the group will accept your work.

People need to take criticism better.

[lindisfarne]

7. Not at all true. DUers have long been generating multiple threads on same topic, not even bothering

to check whether a thread has been started in the last 24 hours. If that was stopped, the thread count for the website would be cut in half.

[Laelth]

27. As I said, I don't have the data to prove my theory.

If you haven't observed the increase in repetitive threads, it's entirely possible I am just imagining it.

Thanks for the response.

:dem:

-Laelth

[lindisfarne]

28. Theories require data. So it's not a theory if no data. It might be a personal bias to see what you

want.

[Laelth]

74. It might be.

That, in fact, is why I asked in the OP whether other members had noticed the same trend I noticed ... that the unrec function spawns a lot of redundant threads.

:dem:

-Laelth

[lunatica]

8. Soon people will get bored and stop unrecking

Jesus! A new word has been born!

[Laelth]

29. That's possible.

I think the admins wanted to cut down on flame wars. After all, if you let people just push a "bad" button, they might feel better and not post flames. On the other hand, under the new system, people might both unrec and post flames too. Who knows?

:shrug:

Thanks for the response.

:dem:

-Laelth

[zeemike]

9. And at the same time fewer posts in the threads

Because now if you don't agree with the OP just hit unrec and no need to argue your case. I t works twice as good because you don't have to kick it.

[BurtWorm]

10. That kills the 'kills free speech' hypothesis.

[Laelth]

30. Well, yes and no.

If I am right (and I am not sure that I am), you're seeing a lot of spam because people don't believe they're getting heard.

If they felt they were being heard, there wouldn't be so many dupe threads.

That's my argument, in any event.

Thanks for the response.

:dem:

-Laelth

[BurtWorm]

37. The feature is less than a day old.

Do you think people will still be chattering and fretting about it like this even a month from now? In a month, we'll have an even better idea ( ;-) ) of its effect. Either you're right and this will become Unrecommend Underground, or I'm right and it will become a part of the background, just as polls, recommend, journals and other once new features have become.

[Laelth]

40. The admins are testing it.

Because they are, and because I am rather fond of this site, I feel I have a duty to weigh in on it.

I have no idea what this ever-changing site will become.

I was just wondering whether the unrec was causing a lot more spam or whether I was imagining it. That's all.

:)

:dem:

-Laelth

[redqueen]

17. Completely disagree.

Many people have always seemed to prefer starting their own topic to searching for one and adding their two cents there.

[slipslidingaway]

22. I think your observation may be correct...

many of the threads about the unrec feature have dropped off the greatest page.

I thought about starting one on the diminished usefulness of the left side of the GP as we discussed in another thread.

The thread I posted it in dropped off the GP and I was hoping that others would chime in as well.

[Laelth]

60. It is becoming increasingly hard for minority voices (on any topic) to be heard.

If that's what we want, so be it, but I would like the admins to make that decision honestly and with a clear understanding of what they are doing.

Thanks for the response.

:dem:

-Laelth

[slipslidingaway]

62. I think that will happen as well...

and you're welcome.

[fishwax]

32. the creation of multiple new threads about the same topic is nothing new

"When these extremely popular topics came along in the past, a lot of people would simply add their two cents to the thread on the Greatest Page rather than starting another, new thread."

That's not how I've seen it over the years. Quite the opposite, in fact.

There are a lot of unrec threads now, but that's not a big surprise given that we've had barely more than a day to deal with the new feature. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out after some more time ...

[WI_DEM]

33. Nope, haven't noticed more threads than usual.

[WI_DEM]

41. P.S. now that you have mentioned it I have noticed more threads all complaining about the unrec key

[Laelth]

50. I'm starting to see a lot of threads attacking those who complain about it too. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Laelth]

42. Cool.

Perhaps I am imagining it.

Thanks for the response.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Renew Deal]

36. Funny you mention that.

That's what it was like here during the 2004 primary. I'm pretty sure that's before the rec feature was set up. Everyone would try to out-shout the other person and it was an endless stream of attack and counterattack threads.

[scheming daemons]

44. That sounds like the 2008 primary to me

;-)

[Renew Deal]

38. One more thing...

I think the old rec feature was a way for all to "be heard." It's what I was talking about before. The greatest page is diminished by the loss of opinions.

[marketcrazy1]

45. how can i hide unrec threads

anyone?????

[Renew Deal]

47. Click on the little X next to the thread title on the main GD page.

:D

[sufrommich]

46. All the "unrec" really proves is that there are

an astounding number of posters here with a Greatest Page fetish.

[gkhouston]

51. It's way too soon to know that. The current spate could simply be the

typical flavor-of-the-day GD dogpile.

[Laelth]

58. Could be. This just seems like a huge pile to me.

And, I guess the point that I was making is that it seems the minority, in any contested debate, will insist on being heard. Allowing the minority to have a thread on the Greatest Page that reflects their views, perhaps, assuages them. Without that representation, it seems members of the minority will start countless threads to insure that they are heard.

Does that make sense?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[gkhouston]

63. Um, sounds kind of like extortion. n/t

[Laelth]

64. That or just perpetual irritation.

Either way, it's not a violation of the DU rules. If we want the minority to shut up, perhaps it's easiest to just let them have a thread or two on the Greatest Page so that they feel like they have been heard. With the unrec function working as it does now, the minority might never feel like it has been heard because they will never be ale to get a thread up on the Greatest Page.

Does that make sense?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[gkhouston]

65. No, they're just as likely to be pissed about only getting a "quota". In any

case, they'll post as many threads elsewhere as they damned well please. If that becomes abusive, the mods will handle it.

[Laelth]

66. Um, so I guess you don't care whether they feel like they have been heard.

Is that what you're saying?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[gkhouston]

70. No, I really don't care. As a practical matter, it would be ridiculous to.

There are thousands of people on DU. If all of them defined "feel like I'm not being heard" as "my thread didn't make it to the Greatest Page", then DU would be awash in dejected posters. I see no reason to single out some ill-defined subset of DU purportedly holding passionate beliefs that will allegedly never make it to the Greatest Page unless they're handed an advantage over everyone else.

[Laelth]

73. At least you're honest. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Vidar]

52. Flavor of the day.

[Laelth]

59. Yes, of course.

But does the unrec feature actually spawn more threads on the flavor of the day, whatever that may be? That's what I am asking.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Renew Deal]

55. What about the other 1%?

[TexasObserver]

54. Yeah, but at least we don't have threads lauding the perv.

Why won't everyone agree with you on everything?!

That is so rude of everyone.

[Laelth]

56. Fair enough. Rub salt in a wound, why don't you?

Ignore earned.

:dem:

-Laelth

[TexasObserver]

57. Well, that is how one cures ham.

[slipslidingaway]

67. It is happening, threads get stuck in the same forum and never

get feedback from people who remain mainly in one forum.

My thread could use a rec, I know you said that you used the latest/greatest combo as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6041515&mesg_id=6041515

[Laelth]

68. Happy to rec it.

I do use the Greatest Page (or I did), and then I scan GD and Georgia. I hope the admins give us a "Hottest" Page. That will address most of my concerns.

:dem:

-Laelth

[slipslidingaway]

69. Thanks...

now I wonder how many recs that thread needs to get back to positive.

:)


A Hottest page might have too many flame war threads in it.


:shrug:

[Laelth]

72. I hear you.

But I think flame wars are interesting. They generate the most conversation. Those threads are the ones the members are actually talking about.

That's valuable, imho.

:dem:

-Laelth

[abumbyanyothername]

71. Unrec has nothing to do with where a thread is on the GD page

only whether it gets to greatest.

But at least all these unrec threads have driven the Palin threads into the ground.

So they're good for something.