Originally Posted by cblaisd
I am not sure how one rates a "thread" absent some evaluation of the components of a thread -- the quality of the posts therein and the quality of the posters, in the opinion of the one rating. How would you rate a thread otherwise without all reference to these things?
There are posters, imo, whose posts I don't think much of in general. As do you, I suspect. That's one component of "thread rating" (and it's one that all of us do informally every time we read FT).
Actually, that's where I disagree... let's say, purely hypothetical, of course, poster X, whom I (hypothetically) might sometimes view as a disruptive influence on Flyertalk, posts great information on something. Or poster Y, who I sometimes disagree with, posts great advice on something. If I were to use the thread rating feature (I don't think I'd use it much anyway, if at all), I would give those threads a positive rating.
Why should I give the thread a negative rating, just because it was poster X or poster Y who posted it?
That seems to be the logic you seem to be in favor of.
(Also, as a sidenote, if you admit that there are posters whose posts you don't think much of in general, and that causes you to treat their posts differently, are you sure that is a good prerequisite for being impartial (which in one of your roles would be a good idea, I think))?