+1, -1, ...

[Genady]

I think it would be useful, helpful, and meaningful to have separate counts for positive and negative reactions on a post, rather than their sum. Also, to see lists of users who gave these positive and negative marks.

[iNow]

We used to have this here and seeing who neg repped you led to an epidemic of retaliatory neg reps back. The anonymity helps prevent tensions from snowballing. 

[Genady]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

We used to have this here and seeing who neg repped you led to an epidemic of retaliatory neg reps back. The anonymity helps prevent tensions from snowballing. 

OK. How about having two separate counts? Seeing who pos repped?

[dimreepr]

15 minutes ago, Genady said:

OK. How about having two separate counts? Seeing who pos repped?

Would that make you feel better?

[Genady]

5 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Would that make you feel better?

Having two separate counts, certainly.

Seeing who positively marked, depends.

[swansont]

As iNow has noted, anonymity’s important to reduce vendettas. It’s the approach that causes the fewest problems.

Staff can see who gives the votes, and we have removed the ability to give feedback from people who were abusing the system.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Would that make you feel better?

It would probably make Genady feel better informed, and with less condescension. 

I'm not sure the software can display both votes, but I think it would be interesting to know how the + and - breaks down (without knowing who voted which way). Seeing a post that has a +2 score doesn't tell you the interesting fact that 16 people voted it down and 18 voted it up.

[MigL]

You can usually tell ...

If Notifications informs you that 3 people reacted to a specific post, and the counter below your post is showing +1, then you know that, of the three votes, one was negative.

Its almost like non-local entanglement 😄 .

[Genady]

20 minutes ago, MigL said:

You can usually tell ...

If Notifications informs you that 3 people reacted to a specific post, and the counter below your post is showing +1, then you know that, of the three votes, one was negative.

Its almost like non-local entanglement 😄 .

Yes, but, (1) I'm interested in the breakdown of not only my posts, but some posts of other members, and (2) the reactions are often spread over time and don't appear as one count in the notification.

Seeing who voted positively has two advantages: (1) members often post a one-line comment just to let know that they up-voted some post; this would be not needed, (2) as an extreme example, if JohnPBailey has upvoted my post, I would check what is wrong about it.

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Staff can see who gives the votes

So, the data are there. It is only a matter of displaying some of them.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

So, the data are there. It is only a matter of displaying some of them.

If you click on someone's rep score for a single post, does it break it down into + and - scores, but without names?

[joigus]

Besides, guessing is a lot more fun...

[zapatos]

While I'm pretty free with the rep points I don't think they really mean much. It may give you a warm fuzzy that someone upvoted your post but you rarely know why.

Was I witty? Insightful? Accurate? Complete? Rude? Wrong? Didn't directly answer the question? Too technical? Not technical enough? You like me? Don't like me? You agree with me? Don't like my liberal leanings? You caught my reference to Seinfeld? You misunderstood me? I misunderstood you?

Unless someone tells you, the meaning of the rep gives you no more than the most general of hints. Even if you know it came from me, you don't really know why.

[Genady]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

If you click on someone's rep score for a single post, does it break it down into + and - scores, but without names?

No, I don't see it.

[Phi for All]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

No, I don't see it.

If the software is capable of displaying the breakdown, that's where you would see it. I'll check with an Administrator.

[Genady]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

While I'm pretty free with the rep points I don't think they really mean much. It may give you a warm fuzzy that someone upvoted your post but you rarely know why.

Was I witty? Insightful? Accurate? Complete? Rude? Wrong? Didn't directly answer the question? Too technical? Not technical enough? You like me? Don't like me? You agree with me? Don't like my liberal leanings? You caught my reference to Seinfeld? You misunderstood me? I misunderstood you?

Unless someone tells you, the meaning of the rep gives you no more than the most general of hints. Even if you know it came from me, you don't really know why.

Regarding upvoting, only the questions "Was I witty? Insightful? Accurate? Complete? You like me? You agree with me? You caught my reference to Seinfeld?" from the list apply. These nuances aren't really important, IMO, and often are clear from the content of a marked post. They all mean, "Good point." One will elaborate in a comment if they want people to know what specifically they liked.

[zapatos]

25 minutes ago, Genady said:

These nuances aren't really important, IMO,

Sure, I can see that. But then neither is hearing someone say "good point" (IMO). If they want to let you know they like your post they can tell you in a comment. That's pretty common practice here.

[swansont]

What’s going to change if this information is made available?

[studiot]

Surely it would be much more useful to add a post counter and numbering than to add an up/downvite identifier  ?

Edited December 17, 2022 by studiot

[Genady]

23 minutes ago, swansont said:

What’s going to change if this information is made available?

Actually, I don't know what a purpose or usage of this number is now. What does it tell and to whom?

 

21 minutes ago, studiot said:

Surely it would be much more useful to add a post counter and numbering than to add an up/downvite identifier  ?

It surely would be very useful.

[Phi for All]

The software can't display both scores, just the total. Sorry. For what it's worth, we don't get that many posts where there's a lot of up and down votes.

[Genady]

5 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

The software can't display both scores, just the total. Sorry. For what it's worth, we don't get that many posts where there's a lot of up and down votes.

Thank you for checking. Right, it doesn't matter if there is not much to show anyway.

[swansont]

We do get some, where a petty downvote is canceled. And occasionally where a crackpot upvotes a fellow crackpot and that gets nullified.

[iNow]

The software here is configurable, not customizable. Not all ideas are able to be configured within the UI

[dimreepr]

21 hours ago, Phi for All said:

It would probably make Genady feel better informed, and with less condescension. 

I'm not sure the software can display both votes, but I think it would be interesting to know how the + and - breaks down (without knowing who voted which way). Seeing a post that has a +2 score doesn't tell you the interesting fact that 16 people voted it down and 18 voted it up.

Sorry @Genady that came across way more condescending than was intended, I just not sure what benefit would come from knowing that some people like what you say and some don't; whilst there's a lesson to be had, especially with a neg, I think the fact that it's given anonymously gives the lesson more gravity. 

[Genady]

13 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Sorry @Genady that came across way more condescending than was intended, I just not sure what benefit would come from knowing that some people like what you say and some don't; whilst there's a lesson to be had, especially with a neg, I think the fact that it's given anonymously gives the lesson more gravity. 

I thought that a ratio would've been more meaningful number than an absolute count. Say, do 2 positives mean that 100% of the responders liked the post, or do they mean that 55% liked it and 45% disliked it? Also, the total number of responders would've been informative, i.e., was it 2 or 20 members that reacted to the post? (All this is immaterial now.)