[Flyingdwarf]

Agreed. I don't really know that a system like this needs to be added. I haven't been around this forum that long, but I have a fair idea who I want to pay attention to and who I don't.

[noflash]

Originally Posted by ABR

Why so bitter, noflash? Cheer up!

I'm not, thanks though.

[noflash]

Originally Posted by ben1364

I can certainly understand why you would feel that way. <g>

I changed my mind, let's do it! How many times can I ding someone?

[JB 330ci]

If implemented correctly it would serve a purpose however it is prone to abuse and if you disagree with someone you might give them a bad rating.

Seems like everyone agrees on the Ignore function. Serves its purpose without any concern over ratings which would make the situation (useless posts, who judges a useless post etc.) more difficult.

[3aficionado]

Just throwing out an idea here... but what about one of those 5 star systems where each user can vote once for each post. Since its an active area on the page its not like you need to do anything more than select the number of stars as you are reading - you don’t have to leave the page you are reading.

Then you can skip bad posts when it states 2 out of 50 people found this post useful or this post was given an average of 1 star from 80 people.

To rank the user you can take an average of the number of posts and the average star ranking from each post. From that you can see who is really useful or not.

This system gives a two useful statistics to other users. It shows if the next thread I’m about to read is worth my time. And it shows if a particular user is worth my time to respond.

Those with good rankings aren’t going to risk posting crap since the low star rating for the crap post will bring down their overall rankings.

[ABR]

Good post 3aficionado.

Here is another idea, I think some people like "e90fleet" should have Moderator status. Permanent good rating (sort of).

[Oz]

I prefer not to have those stars next to threads because
1) They take up too much space
2) Some people DO abuse it (I noticed this from other forums I frequent)

[roburado]

Personally, I don't favor a rating system.

How hard is it to mentally filter out the garbage? How hard is it to avoid threads that ask questions that one finds repetitive? How hard is it to tell good info from bad? How hard is it to retain a healthy skepticism? How hard is it to just plain ignore a user by just scrolling past his/her post or even setting your preferences to ignore a poster? I don't think that any of those things is particularly difficult when one takes the short time it takes to critically evaluate what one is reading.

[Oz]

This was going to happen eventually. The car has been out for almost a year now so many of the questions have already been answered numerous times. People are going to come to this forum and ask before searching no matter what. I think it's pretty hard to stop that from happening

[Squawks]

It's not about how hard it is to accomplish a rather facile task. It's the whole concept of convenience.

How hard is it to flick on your headlights on your E90? How hard is it to manage a window crank? How hard is it to turn off your blinkers after changing langes? How hard is it to twist an a/c temperature knob? How hard is it to reach the center console to change volumes instead of having it on the steering wheel? How hard is it to open the doors with the actual key? So is BMW stupid for defeating all of these already-facile tasks?

[LEDZEP]

My luck I would approve a thread and then someone would add a bunch of crap to it afterwards.

[sdorn]

Originally Posted by Squawks

How hard is it to flick on your headlights on your E90? How hard is it to manage a window crank? How hard is it to turn off your blinkers after changing langes? How hard is it to twist an a/c temperature knob? How hard is it to reach the center console to change volumes instead of having it on the steering wheel? How hard is it to open the doors with the actual key? So is BMW stupid for defeating all of these already-facile tasks?

So are you saying BMW owners are lazier than other people?

j/k

[ABR]

Too bad it was moved to dead area.

[ksfrogman]

This is a silly idea IMO. I'd rather spend my time reading about cars, than to waste my time rating someone or seeing how someone rated me or someone else. How would you prevent abuse of the system? What impact would it have? Do you think a troller would care less about what his/her rating is?

We already have forum guidelines. We don't need a rating system other than what already exists for trades: sellers and buyers.

[e90rocks]

Originally Posted by ksfrogman

This is a silly idea IMO. I'd rather spend my time reading about cars, than to waste my time rating someone or seeing how someone rated me or someone else. How would you prevent abuse of the system? What impact would it have? Do you think a troller would care less about what his/her rating is?

We already have forum guidelines. We don't need a rating system other than what already exists for trades: sellers and buyers.

The system of weighting votes for value is about as flawed as the College Football BCS rankings. That is not to say that it's a bad idea per se, only that there are inherent problems when rankers are also the rankees. This is not foreign to businesses or in medical education, but I think it's a lot more trouble than it will be worth, and could result in retaliatory ranking.

I would trust Jason and Mark to just put up a probation list in an unaddable thread, and I suppose they could add an honor roll...but then we're still looking at an oligarchy.

Still, by now I have a list in my brain of which posters put up useful stuff and which ones are only good for crap (and who is knowledgeable in one area but not in others), but I seriously doubt if anyone else cares about my personal "good poster" mental list

[vladinecko]

also consider the fact how much stress this would put on the servers. it's not somethint like amazon has, where you rate reviews because each product only gets a few reviews and plus, they have a system in place to handle an enormous load of connections.

so, if a thread has, on average, 40-50 replies, in addition to those server requests that handle new posts, edits or deletions, you'd add an extra request per each post that would get rated.

plus, i think majority people would just ignore the fact such an option even exists. so, you'd end up with a million posts with a note next to each of them saying "0 out of 0 people found this post useful."

[Mark]

Honestly, a user rating system sounds good to me in theory but I just don't know how it would play out in the "real" world. What I mean is, most users don't post 100% crap or 100% non-sense, so that even though a user has a piss-poor rep, you never know when he might be posting something postive and so would you really ignore all his threads ? I'm just not sure how well the system would work

[sdorn]

There is a Thread Rating system. I never noticed it before today. Was it always there?

[Jason]

Originally Posted by sdorn

There is a Thread Rating system. I never noticed it before today. Was it always there?

Yep

[poldim]

I can deffinetly see where noflash is coming from. But I also thing the rating and ignoring people under an X rating would be extremely useful as he stated.

My suggestion would be not 0 to 10 because I think its really hard to tell what a 7 or 3 or something else is. I suggest 3: Useless, intermediate, and brilliant. Have the system assign 0, 5, and 10 to each, and then average the value for the members.

Have the option of having a user only see "> X" posts and also have a per thread/per view option in every thread at the some where at the the bottom of the thread.


My fear is that in reality it will only be used by a selected number of members, and thus the rateings will only be based on those few members. I dont use the current thread rating, so I dont think I would rate threads or users if another one is created or the current one is modified, but I might use it for cleaning out bad threads for seeing only useful posts.