Need some opinions and suggestions from active reddit users!

[Reality]

of course.

what may work is a rating system that starts at 5 (or 6) and goes to 10. --I'd avoid starting at 1 because 1 feels like downgrading.
any vote is a positive effect but 10 is really special.

and instead of an average voter score do a composite... i.e. total votes times total ratings. 50 x 10 plus 20 x 5 would be 600, not 8.5.
so all votes help. keeps the trolls at bay. also encourages feedback for their effoprt even if a post isn;t 10 worthy.

I have read several studies and comments by sites and their developers over the years that used to offer ranged-based voting (1-4 stars, 1-5 starts, 1-10 rating, etc.) and they found that most users voted either the minimum or maximum each time they voted because when they did not really like or dislike the content, they simply did not care to vote. This is why most sites have replaced their range voting systems with simple up/down, like/dislike, etc. voting systems.

You can always do something like make up votes worth 2 or 3 points for example, and leave down votes as -1 point, but that only helps to mask or partially mitigate the problem, not remove it. It just means that it will take a few more users banded together to mute the target user or users.

That said, I'm a big fan of keeping things simple, not to mention familiar, and since most users are familiar with the simple up/down system, that would be where I would start.

 

[CyberB0b]

@Reality
Drupal has an organic groups module that sounds like it has some of the functionality you are after.

 

[Reality]

@Reality
Drupal has an organic groups module that sounds like it has some of the functionality you are after.

I do not use third party software in my projects. I do all of my own development. Software like WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, etc. are extremely bloated, poorly structured, poorly optimized for performance and really made for people who have no or little development skills and/or a very limited budget. While developers will use those software packages for their clients' sites, it is usually because their clients have very small budgets and that's the only way they can develop the sites their clients want without losing a lot of money.

I have created custom site and content management software for clients just like WordPress, Drupal, etc. because they did not want the bloat nor the potential exploits and vulnerabilities that come from running those applications, especially the plugins (which is how most WP sites are hacked by the way). Those packages rely heavily on static caching to compensate for their internal poor structure. Even then, they make way too many requests to the server. When HTTP/2 becomes standard, this will be less of an issue, but for now, it's a huge problem, especially when those sites experience rapid traffic surges due to premium exposure on other sites (home page of reddit for example). More and more sites are using CDN services to help deal with this as well, but that's yet another example of using something else to compensate for poor structure and development.

That said, even if I was interested in using something like that, they do not do what I am doing. If they did, I would not be creating this project. Groups are not even the focus of the project for example.

 

[Pandora]

Best thing about reddit: No signature lines, and no oversized avatar images. Keeps everything clean, neat, and readable.

Navigating through board with endless reams of signatures during mock draft season is a pain in the ***.

 

[Reality]

Best thing about reddit: No signature lines, and no oversized avatar images. Keeps everything clean, neat, and readable.

Navigating through board with endless reams of signatures during mock draft season is a pain in the ***.

I agree completely. I hate forum signatures, but I know some users like them.

 

[Junglist]

I love r/notmyjob

 

[Carl23]

1. Login data transfer must be encrypted.
2. If possible, have your platform perform link-checking to see if SSL versions of links are available. If so, convert them to HTTPS. Easier to bypass content filtering.
3. I like the Reddit feature of buying gold for certain posts/people as it can help keep you funded.
4. Keep it moderated like it was #prior# to the destruction of /FatPeopleHate


I may have more, but I am on a tablet and hate typing...

 

[Cowboy Brian]

Love the concept and both sites, particularly feel the readchan layout has quite a bit of potential. I'd like to see you give a few specific industries/sector a go and take a more narrow approach. Think financechan or campuschan, overall competition within the space for user-determined quality content is quite immense - it will be hard to compete on that turf. Focusing on a specific industry with a rabid following without much (free) public aggregation of content - such as the finance industry - could be the perfect way to launch and then expand from there. Similar to how Genius started with the rap genre niche and has now expanded into literature, news, etc;.

While I recognize it is beyond easy to type in #business or #finance, taking a more granular approach and being able to visit financechan and quickly type in #em to see emerging markets news or #corporatedebt to read about recent corporate debt issuance could be an extremely valuable tool. The only real competitors in the space are Reuters Eikon and the Bloomberg Terminal, each costing many thousands of dollars per month ($24,000 a year per user in the case of a Bloomberg Terminal).

 

[Illini88228]

I understand the concern about people abusing downvoting, but to me, it is essential functionality at this point. I have found myself gravitating to /r/cowboys a lot over the last year or so just because the worthless posts get downvoted out of sight. With chronological threads, I have to wade through tons of posts that don't contribute anything interesting before I happen upon the worthwhile content. A lot of times the bad posts aren't necessarily breaking any particular rules, they just don't contribute anything interesting to the discussion. Here on cowboyszone, I'm constantly trying to balance ignoring users who post the same complaints or worthless one-liners in every thread with being able to follow the conversation that's happening.

But, I also like heavy-handed Mods. I'd much rather lose the occasional controversial opinion that might have been unfairly deleted than have to wade through pages of threads filled with people who constantly skirt just inside the trolling policy, so I recognize that my taste may be weird.

 

[Reality]

I understand the concern about people abusing downvoting, but to me, it is essential functionality at this point. I have found myself gravitating to /r/cowboys a lot over the last year or so just because the worthless posts get downvoted out of sight. With chronological threads, I have to wade through tons of posts that don't contribute anything interesting before I happen upon the worthwhile content. A lot of times the bad posts aren't necessarily breaking any particular rules, they just don't contribute anything interesting to the discussion. Here on cowboyszone, I'm constantly trying to balance ignoring users who post the same complaints or worthless one-liners in every thread with being able to follow the conversation that's happening.

But, I also like heavy-handed Mods. I'd much rather lose the occasional controversial opinion that might have been unfairly deleted than have to wade through pages of threads filled with people who constantly skirt just inside the trolling policy, so I recognize that my taste may be weird.

That's great as long as your views are inline with the mods and the "bad" posts are those you disagree with. What happens when you are on the other side? What happens when a group of users target a user simply because he/she is popular and well-liked and coordinate a non-stop effort to downvote their posts off the page? As I said in my earlier post, from a simple view point, downvoting sounds great. Unfortunately, the only way that works is if you are are aligned with the majority of users on almost every topic. However, that rarely happens with some subjects like sports and politics. There are huge Cowboys fans who love the team and Romo. There are others who are ready to move on from Romo due to injuries, age, etc. Imagine if your opinion was in the minority on that debate. You might as well not even post it.

What happens when another subreddit with a much larger user base attacks your subreddit? For example, your favorite sports team's greatest rival has 5 times the users in their subreddit and they come over and upvote negative threads about your team and downvote positive threads? Downvoting was meant to be a helpful tool, but it is used more often as a weapon these days. With a little bit of effort, it can be used to bully and suppress any opposing viewpoints, even when those viewpoints may be in the right.

 

[CyberB0b]

I think you are seriously overestimating the amount of cooperation that would be required for an entire group of people to consider against a subreddit. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's probably a non-issue with adequate moderation.

 

[Reality]

I think you are seriously overestimating the amount of cooperation that would be required for an entire group of people to consider against a subreddit. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's probably a non-issue with adequate moderation.

That may be true with something the size of reddit, but for a new service, or even one that's only been out for a few months to a year, there would be a lot of unevenly populated communities/forums/subreddits/etc. So maybe in 2-3 years, down voting might be feasible given a large enough amount of daily traffic.