Originally Posted by
SkiAdcock
1. Well, if helpful is so helpful & won't be gamed as you, nsx & others assure those of us who have the concern that it could be, then by that same argument a nonhelpful won't be gamed either. You can't have it both ways
FWIW - I don't think there's enough support & I'm not wildly behind the idea. I just want to point out the fallacy of the argument.
If you're going to call an argument fallacious, then you need to illustrate why. You didn't do that.
If the only option is "Helpful," then the only possible outcomes are that post is shown as being helpful or that post has no rating.
If you have a "Helpful" and a "Not Helpful" option, then there are three possible outcomes: the post is shown as being helpful, the post has no rating, or the post receives a negative score.
In the last case--the post receiving a negative score--you have the potential for that poster to be seen poorly by other members reading the thread. That creates ill-will on the part of the poster towards the members who rated him or her poorly. That creates animosity and the potential for inter-personal conflict.
If the worst that can happen is that your post gets
no score, then it's kind of hard for you to get offended and pitch a snit fit about the rating.
It's for this exact reason why Facebook does not have a "dislike" button, and it works quite well there. I have never ONCE seen anyone complain that someone else's posts got more likes than his/her own.
Originally Posted by
SkiAdcock
2. Actually that's not how the system as it's being proposed. It may be because of input on this thread, but it's not necessarily there yet. And there's no word by IB on whether they can separate it/make it to posts & not attached to members. Heck, the recently concluded trial shows that it does attach to members.
Well, the head proponent of this proposal (and, by reading your posts, the one who is attempting to unilaterally push this through) didn't support the implementation as it was shown during the test period and has, as I recall, said that he would prefer it be tied to the posts rather than the poster and has agreed that a site-wide counter is potentially counter-productive. So, while I can't speak for him, I think it's safe to say that if that's how the chief proponent of this proposal says it should be, then that's what the proposal will be.