Recommendations

Originally posted by darvlay
Palynka, maybe if you had subscribed all those years we told you to, you wouldn't be begging for more recs now, would you?

You have only yourself to blame. 😏

Is that why you have this newfound contempt for recs?

Originally posted by darvlay
It's evidence that 10 people care and it's barely that. And no one is stopping you from discussing the issue, so feel free to gad on hopelessly about it.

I think it's funny that you of all people are taking this stance that the number of (or lack of) recs is some form of substantial evidence.

I agree with Darv, the fact that a small group of people is still jonesing for a rec count to raise their self-esteem is not evidence of over-whelming support.

I imagine that the vast majority of users could care less.

Originally posted by Red Night
I agree with Darv, the fact that a small group of people is still jonesing for a rec count to raise their self-esteem is not evidence of over-whelming support.

I imagine that the vast majority of users could care less.

But you do care: you oppose it. Sure, I've no doubt that the vast majority
of the RHP community (most of whom do not post) have no feelings whatsoever
on the issue. And of the small subset of those who do post, a good number
have never known anything different than the current situation. Of the
ones with the recollection, I'm sure the majority of those are ambivalent.

So what? They either won't be affected or don't care about the changes
anyway. So why does their non-opinion even matter?

You, however, seem opposed to this because you think that those who
think this system sucks use recs to justify their existence. But that's
simply an arrogant assertion on your part. Sure, there are a few people
who say 'Gee. I'm lonely, give me a rec,' and you're right, they are
pathetic.

But there are a few of us who want to see the old system reinstated so
that we can recommend good posts so that others of us will find them
with greater ease (on the recommended page).

So, please desist with lumping me and other members into this pathetic
group and recognize that our interests are simply to see the best posts
with greater ease.

Either that, or just eliminate the system altogether because it's utterly
failing to live up to its intention: list the best posts RHP has to offer.

Nemesio

Originally posted by darvlay
Since the rec system was changed, the site is completely the same. So who cares?

The issue for me is that the old recommended post list tended to have
lots of posts worth reading. I didn't like them all, to be sure, but at
least there were, say, five or six on the first page and another few on
the second page that had something interesting. It drew my attention
to those threads and allowed me to participate.

Of course there were always the few 'lolz' and 'u suk d00d' that got one
or two recs from friends, but they were stuck on page five or six which
I never bothered to read. Now, because fewer people are bothering to
use recs altogether, they're on the first page and many posts which
ought to be recced aren't getting it for whatever reason.

This is not 'completely the same,' and it astounds me that you could say
that with a straight face.

And, if you are so blithely unaffected by the change in system, then what
difference does it make to you if it gets changed back? If you can't notice
a difference, but a bunch of people can, then why do you seemingly
oppose it?

Lastly, do you or Red Night really believe that greater or fewer than 2.5
posts a week are worth reccing? Personally, I think it's greater. I often
want to rec things and I'm simply unable to do so (having used up my
monthly quota) or I'm gunshy, fearful of not being able to recommend
another post later.

So, what do you think, Darvlay? Do you really think that 2.5 posts a week
is a reasonable number?

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
The issue for me is that the old recommended post list tended to have
lots of posts worth reading. I didn't like them all, to be sure, but at
least there were, say, five or six on the first page and another few on
the second page that had something interesting. It drew my attention
to those threads and allowed me to participate.

Of course there ...[text shortened]... lay? Do you really think that 2.5 posts a week
is a reasonable number?

Nemesio

How does having a rec count lead to a better recommended list?

At the time they did away with the rec count one of the arguments was that none of the posts were really rec-worthy.

"Did he tell your stupied" got a dozen recs.

So did, "Good god already"

Most of the wrecked posts were a long those lines.

I would say that once a month I see something on the recommended list that deserved the attention it got.

Originally posted by Red Night
How does having a rec count lead to a better recommended list?

At the time they did away with the rec count one of the arguments was that none of the posts were really rec-worthy.

"Did he tell your stupied" got a dozen recs.

So did, "Good god already"

Most of the wrecked posts were a long those lines.

I would say that once a month I see something on the recommended list that deserved the attention it got.

Did you answer the question (it was 'Do you think that roughly 2.5 posts/week are rec-worthy)?

If the complaint back that was that unrecced posts were getting recced, then the 'solution' has
changed nothing, because it's the same thing. The only difference now is that posts that ought
to be recced are receiving none because people have too few.

I'd be interested in knowing the criteria by which you judge a post rec-worthy.

Nemesio

Originally posted by darvlay
Xanthos doesn't troll the forums with wise ass remarks.

Aaah, the good old days. I must have given him 500+ recs.

Of all the smart-asses - he was THE ONE.

Originally posted by Red Night
"Did he tell your stupied"

LULZ!!one

Originally posted by Nemesio
The issue for me is that the old recommended post list tended to have
lots of posts worth reading. I didn't like them all, to be sure, but at
least there were, say, five or six on the first page and another few on
the second page that had something interesting. It drew my attention
to those threads and allowed me to participate.

Of course there lay? Do you really think that 2.5 posts a week
is a reasonable number?

Nemesio

You are right in that I don't care one way or another however you are wrong in stating that I oppose any change; I don't. I didn't care before and I don't care now. The administrators are free to change the site any way they please. I only voice my opinion because I came across the thread, read it and decided to say something - you and Palynka seem to think that there is something dubious about that, which is strange. I disagree that the recommended posts are much worse than they used to be. Admittedly, I never checked them as often as the lot of you seemed to have, but I still would peruse them every so often. Looking at them today, I can't really see how you would think that it is any different than it was before. There are a smidgen of "serious" type post and site ideas and then mostly insults. That's how it's always been as far as I can remember. I don't ever recall seeing a "lolz" as a recommended post on the first page. I agree with you that fewer people are using their recommendations these days and in that sense I suppose the site is "different", but the results on the recommended page are generally still the same, IMO.

When I did have rec capabilities I would rec maybe one post a week, three at the the most. Now I recommend 0 posts per week, so yes 2.5 posts a week is a reasonable number to me.

If you're having trouble finding decent threads to read, don't blame it on the lack of recommendations - blame it on the lack of recommendable posts/posters. You claim that many posts which ought to be recced aren't getting recced for whatever reason - have you ever stopped to think that maybe you're the only one who finds these posts interesting? (Palynka would surely claim that there is sufficient evidence of that!). I don't think I've seen you venture out of the god-forsaken Spirituality forum in years; a place where there is nothing worth recommending to others to read so I'm not altogether shocked that you can't find more posts worth reading on your own. 😛

Originally posted by Palynka
I don't think the rec count has any substantial value, but I do think that they encouraged people to try a bit harder with their posts. After all, it's a better way of getting some feedback from the people who appreciated reading your post than waiting for "lulz" or "hahaha", "lol", etc.

It never made me "try harder". 😕

Originally posted by darvlay
It never made me "try harder". 😕

So why are your posts crap nowadays?

Originally posted by Palynka
So why are your posts crap nowadays?

Because I lack confidence?