http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6833864Oh my.
The large-proboscised primitive, Oscar Wilde:
Cyrano (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:00 PM
Original message
Why I think “recommend†“unrecommend†sucks a lot
Had the “Washington Post†used a “recommend†“unrecommend†system during Watergate, Richard Nixon might never have been forced to resign.
Tomorrow’s media of influence won’t be the “Washington Post,†“The New York Times,†Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC or any of today’s so-called “mainstream media.†You’re reading tomorrow’s media right now. And you’re reading it every time you link into kos, atrios, digby, Josh Marshall, the Huffington Post, and so many more.
Try not to have a stroke when your grandchildren ask you what a newspaper is. Or what the words “network news†mean.
So what does any of this have to do with “recommend†“unrecommend?†Here’s my answer. Newspapers have editors. And news shows have people who decide what’s important and what isn’t. It was never a “show of hands†system. And that’s something I’m thankful for. Imagine if everyone got to vote about what should appear on page 1, or what story should lead off the nightly news. (Yeah, I know. The “balloon boy†story was not “journalism’s†finest moment.)
So who should decide what should or should not appear on page 1? The publisher and the editors. Skinner is the publisher of DU. And long-term moderators of DU should be the editors who decide what’s important and what’s not. Yeah, it means more work for them. But it sure as hell is a better system than the one in place right now.
We all know that WilliamPitt, kpete, and nancegregg will always end up on page 1 no matter what they write. (And 99% of the time, I have no problem with that, as they contribute such great pieces.)
I’ve never really cared about what made it to page 1 and what didn’t. To me, one (and only one) of the better indicators of what's important and what isn't is the number of people who read an OP. (Sometimes it's only an indication of a good headline. But other times, it's an indicator that it's a topic that many, many people are interested in or concerned about.)
I know there’s a limit to what the DU staff can and can’t do. But I really believe that “recommend†“unrecommend†is not a system that will allow the cream to rise to the top often enough.
Anyhow, that's one person's opinion. Let's hear yours.
Yeah, as if Oscar Wilde really cares about any opinion but his own, but never mind.
ret5hd (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. Un-rec'd for whining about unrec
Iggo (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. I had no idea there was some sort of uproar about rec/unrec.
madokie (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. I guess since I don't much pay any attention to whats on the greatest page
I just rec or un rec as I agree or just simply like or that I don't like what I just read. It's a way for me or for you to let others know how you or I feel, anonymously mind you as it should be, about this particular thread, nothing more or nothing less. It matters not to you or to anyone else for that matter how I might rec or unrec. Once you figure that out you'll feel much better about your time here.
sometimes I type rec sometimes its a +1 but this time it's a -1 and it has nothing to do with you personally. Learn to separate yourself from what you post, for crying out loud whiny butt
Cyrano (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. So having an opinion is whining? Strange new world.
madokie (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. whining about the rec un-rec is and thats what I'm talking about
scubadude (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
7. What I want to know is why do they show it as
Why not show the count as a negative number? Why not show the honest count?
Echo In Light (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Transparency is apparently not conducive to agenda
KatyMan (877 posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. Bullshit.
Had the “Washington Post†used a “recommend†“unrecommend†system during Watergate, Richard Nixon might never have been forced to resign.
Your post is in negative recs, and I was still able to read it. How have you been 'silenced' or 'martyred' or 'victimized' by the fact that a bunch of people unrecced a dumbass vanity thread?
Cyrano (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. So my question to you Katyman is this. WTF are you talking about?
KatyMan (877 posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #13
35. Please. You know what I meant
Unrec doesn't mean your thread disappears. I used this thread as an example: it has negative recs, yet people are still reading and responding to it. So what are you complaining about?
Perhaps the people you mentioned get on 'Page 1' because they post interesting threads? Personally, I wouldn't know, because I never look at those pages, like many many DUers.
It's about you complaining that your pride or vanity were wounded because you got unrecs. Who gives a shit?
What thread did you post that was equal to Watergate that got unrecced?
SidDithers (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
17. Unrecc'd for whining about unrec...
Vickers (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
20. 'I really believe that “recommend†“unrecommend†is not a system that will...'
'...allow the cream to rise to the top'
I *completely* disagree.
I never used to read the Greatest Page, mainly because it was full of vanity crap and bullshit that appealed to the least common denominator.
Now crap like this whiny-ass thread (which I happily Unrec'ed, so much for anonymity!) doesn't make it there.
Go look at the Greatest Page right now and tell me that ain't the cream of this site.
Cyrano (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. It's possible to disagree without using phrases like "... this whiny-ass thread."
Vickers (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. OK. let me rephrase:
"Now crap like this super-dee-dooper whiny-ass thread (which I happily Unrec'ed, so much for anonymity!) doesn't make it there."
Toughen up, buttercup.
Codeine (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
24. Stop worrying about the Greatest Page.
It's ****ing meaningless. If people are talking about it it will be on the page it was posted, be that GD or LBN or whatthe****ever. Just because the Cool Kids don't have their vanity page baloney to reinforce how special they are doesn't mean DU is broken.
For the record, franksolich lists Oscar Wilde as a PoP, and considers him one of the hip, cool, trendy, with-it primitives, with whom it's cool for the uncool primitives to hang.
TexasObserver (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. "Just because the Cool Kids don't have their vanity page baloney ...
... to reinforce how special they are doesn't mean DU is broken."
So true!
It's ALL about the righteous indignation of not getting that cookie any more.
Where's my ******* cookie?!
Okay, franksolich is going to make a new tier of primitives; the cool primitives.
cbdo2007 (710 posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
30. Why does anyone even pay attention to Rec or Unrec?
I come to DU and click on Forums and click on General Discussion.
There's a big ass list of 100 topics down the page.
I read through the items and click on the ones that look interesting.
Seriously, I never even once look over at Rec/Unrec to see if people like it or not. Who cares?
A HERETIC I AM (1000+ posts) Thu Oct-22-09 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
32. These threads are so much fun.
Unrecc'd with glee.
