|
| lynx10. 02. 2014 20:18:03 |
Since I believe most have forgotten, let me remind you that the thumbs system is for easier moderation of these forums. In other words, rating the desirability of posts and not (dis)agreement with them. It was obvious what it would turn into, but at least the reasonable ones among you, please stick to it, otherwise the system will lose the last bit of usefulness that remains.
| (+4) |  | |
|
|
|
|
| JusAvgustin10. 02. 2014 20:18:45 |
Once again: "ugly word" I don't care about minuses and pluses. It's a measure for someone, completely unimportant to me. Not everything is in "thumbs up and thumbs down". Don't strive for +, let's strive for quality. A post whatever it is can have 20+ and it's banal chatter, another can have 2 but a new approach to XY. Don't let that be your measure. The measure is the fact that you did something useful that others appreciate, not silly piling up of pluses and minuses... For whose honor?! For the one who fills his EGO with that? I don't think so. Even more than multiple users, the labile (bend where the wind blows) annoy me, but it's a forum and shit always will be... Ignore, although I know it's sometimes hard... Very hard!
|
|
|
|
| korl10. 02. 2014 21:11:46 |
You are lucky LG is in Polhograjci without internet for a week already. When he returns you won't have time for bickering anymore!
| (+2) | | |
|
|
|
|
| VanSims10. 02. 2014 22:22:37 |
I personally don't give a ***** about pluses and minuses on my comments or about provokers either, but I'm sorry that good writers are leaving because of all this. And exactly as Juš said, someone wants to change something, push something forward - whack on him! In my opinion those who aren't interested in it! Typically Slovenian!
The administrators will have to act if they want their sites to continue fulfilling their mission. I believe they're quiet because they're thinking what to do.
My proposal is still: FOR EVERY COMMENT THERE SHOULD BE A FUNCTION SHOWING WHO GAVE PLUS AND WHO MINUS. Disagreeing with something in democracy is no shame and if someone disagrees with someone let it be visible not hidden.
Someone above also doubted the legal correctness of publicly publishing users' IPs. Wikipedia does that for example and many others. If it were forbidden here Musarca would have exploded long ago!  So any solution that would include that is not at all controversial in my opinion!
|
|
|
|
| tslok110. 02. 2014 22:35:18 |
What good does it do you if you can see who gave pluses and minuses, if the person is hiding behind a nick, just like you?
| (+3) | | |
|
|
|
|
| VanSims10. 02. 2014 22:40:51 |
You'll see which nicks constantly give minuses to certain people. Identify them and take action. Or just the fact that it's publicly visible will deter them, because they'll risk account bans.
|
|
|
|
| ljubitelj gora10. 02. 2014 22:41:09 |
I have only one username , full name on FB.
|
|
|
|
| Daaam10. 02. 2014 22:41:22 |
I bet no one has left the forum because they didn't have enough pluses, but rather because of debates like this one and similar...the main heroes who appear in most debates are well known  ..and it really pisses me off when all those who say pluses and minuses aren't important to them, in the next sentence advocate for their visibility ...world is really upside down....then the real war will start when "that sensitive one" sees who gives him minuses...
|
|
|
|
| Becar10. 02. 2014 22:46:00 |
Main hero is rather you Daaam, since you appear in every such debate. If you hadn't mentioned it, I wouldn't have either.
|
|
|
|
| Becar10. 02. 2014 22:56:51 |
Let the heroes who constantly give minuses be seen. None of them will show up anyway, because they are lowly people. If you could see for example those who gave the lowest ratings to the wonderful Bled pictures by @Pfranci, they would do it only once and never again.
If I were @Pfranci and they spat on my pictures like that, I know I would never post anything again. That's what it's about and nothing else. The forum is losing quality posts because of some losers.
It doesn't matter if you're signed with name and surname. What matters is if you're capable of argued debate, if you've given someone a useful tip, reported conditions etc. Once I asked a guy who signs here with name and surname about snow conditions on Jalovec, but he didn't think it worth replying, even though he hangs around there all the time and knew well. And what's the use of his name and surname?
|
|
|
|
| Becar10. 02. 2014 23:00:48 |
Well then @Becar went to Jalovec and posted all snow conditions publicly, some also via PM to those who asked me. And Becar did this without name and surname. Someone with name and surname wasn't capable of it.
|
|
|
|
| cebelca10. 02. 2014 23:01:15 |
Lowly people who give minuses? Really, to the stake with them. 
Isn't it more lowly to insult and hide behind nicknames?
| (+3) | | |
|
|
|
|
| Becar10. 02. 2014 23:02:17 |
Cebelca, you insult mostly yourself, you just don't realize it.
|
|
|
|
| tslok110. 02. 2014 23:03:36 |
If the conversation is at some normal level and no pointless accusing happens, I think there's no need for exposing and proving who is who.
But if someone attacks another and accuses them of something unfounded, then I think it's fair to at least introduce oneself.
|
|
|
|
| cebelca10. 02. 2014 23:03:56 |
@Becar: Yeah? Is that why, because I stick to my position, just like you?
|
|
|
|
| Becar10. 02. 2014 23:05:46 |
No, because you can't even be bothered to read what I write. Otherwise I can't explain your statements.
|
|
|
|
| cebelca10. 02. 2014 23:09:42 |
I read it, just don't agree.
| (+3) | | |
|
|
|
|
| Becar10. 02. 2014 23:11:36 |
So you don't agree that it's not right when someone rates a quality photo with the lowest rating and that multiple times from different usernames? Come on, now I'm slowly getting fed up with you too. You don't even know what you want to say.
|
|
|
You must log in to post a comment:
If you do not yet have a username, you must first
register.