I just saw that one of my posts got a "vote". How does that differ from a "like"?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
Welcome to TalkBass! Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
What is "vote"?
- Thread starter buldog5151bass
- Start date
Solution
Yeah!!! What he said!!! I echo tha..... oh, never mind.... just kidding. As with ALL things tech/internet, it's all in how it's used. If "upvotes" are used to support one faction or another when some of the usual semi- (or not-so-semi-) personal attacks crop up, that ruins their value (the upvotes, not the attacks; the attacks are almost never valuable... even if deserved...). If folks refrain from using "upvotes" in any instance OTHER than identifying a factual, helpful post, then I can definitely see the benefit of the feature.
The up-vote will move up voted posts when sorted. The OP will always come up first. You’re welcome. Sincerely, ebo of gibsonia.
Hail, Ebo of Gibsonia. May thy neck be always true and thy groove remain unflappable.
Wouldn't you be lost if the comment most voted was a post that was four pages or more deep where the topic is now way off from the original post? Still great but off the original topic.
Or if it was just a great funny comment or picture related to something someone said six pages in?
I feel you may loose the reference with a post being out of order, and may not be as useful as it seems.
Though I have never seen or used this feature before.
Or if it was just a great funny comment or picture related to something someone said six pages in?
I feel you may loose the reference with a post being out of order, and may not be as useful as it seems.
Though I have never seen or used this feature before.
It's kind of like the default sorting of reviews on Amazon and other sites... "Most Helpful" comes first, but many times "Most Helpful" really ends up meaning "Most positive and likely to result in further sales." I usually scan those, then change the setting to "most recent" so I can take my own "temperature" of what recent reviews say rather than relying on hive mentality or, even worse, AI algorithms. I can see searching for an already-asked question I may have, then clicking on "sort by votes" to jump to the most appreciated/popular answers, but then going back to chronological order to see if there's anything I missed.Wouldn't you be lost if the comment most voted was a post that was four pages or more deep where the topic is now way off from the original post? Still great but off the original topic.
Or if it was just a great funny comment or picture related to something someone said six pages in?
I feel you may loose the reference with a post being out of order, and may not be as useful as it seems.
Though I have never seen or used this feature before.
Nobody forces you to sort by votes.
If you keep the default sorting by date, the new system doesn't ruin your user experience.
As others have explained, you like a content because you agree, or you find it amusing.
And you may up-vote for a content if you find it useful for others. Think "if I come back later on this thread and it has grown to 200 pages in the meantime, I will sort it by votes to read the most useful comments first - would I want to see this comment on top of the list?"
Like = I like it
Vote+ = this content is useful = in the future, I want to read it first on top of the list (if I sort by votes)
Sometimes, a content can be enjoyable AND useful, sometimes it can be fun but not so useful.
If it's too sophisticated for you, just ignore the voting system, it really doesn't take up much space
I just wish that one day you will come accross a thread that's super important for you, and it's super long, and you really need to find the best explanation quickly, and you think about sorting by votes, then you will understand the use, and you wil thank TB developers for implementing the feature.
If upvotes really carry weight, they should be transferrable to things like premium membership and/or TB merch (T-shirts and Vegas dealer visors). Kinda like private non transferrable crypto.
I was facetious. Trophies are related to media content posted. I think the only people that get beyond 113 post videos of their playing. I'm not about to subject anyone here to that mistake laden mess
I sense a disturbance in the Force 
This is a good tool to have, but I fear that in the wrong hands it could be used for evil
This is a good tool to have, but I fear that in the wrong hands it could be used for evil
Last edited:
What is "vote"?
Vote is thing human do in democracy.
ALSO see:
Vote is thing human do in democracy.
ALSO see:
Last edited:
It is a flawed system because it only has an upvote function but no downvote.
It is a valid choice, because allowing downvotes has downsides too.
Let’s say someone writes a great explanation why tort is the best, and someone else writes a well thought out post about why tort sucks. So there are two posts that represent both sides well. Now let’s also say that half of readers agree with the first one, and the other half agree with the second one, and vote accordingly. If downvotes are possible and everyone downvotes the post they don’t agree with, all the votes will cancel out and both posts will have zero votes. So even though both posts are informative, they don’t stand out.
The current system will promote both posts, and that’s more helpful for anyone trying to decide whether to go with tort or not.
In reality, it won’t be so extreme, but the idea is that this system will highlight good posts that represent both sides of an argument instead of just highlighting the most popular opinion. I think that is preferable in most cases.
I get what you're saying.
But the truth is that disallowing the downvote also means that the popular opinion always wins which doesn't serve the case of Talkbass well here. We all know that a person asking for amp advice will get served with mesa suggestion left and right and will be further bombarded by it by sorting comments via upvotes. In my mind that's not representing the spirit of forums which exist mainly for open discussion and opinion sharing. Upvoting without downvoting does exactly the opposite because some groups of people will be more vocal with upvotes than others, resulting in skewed upvoted material. Also, you can have 20 people for mesa and will upvote that but 3 for GK, 3 for Ashdown, 3 for Hartke....etc.etc. and those will not be allowed to disagree with the popular mesa opinion by downvoting. It's not a fair share of knowledge/advice.
Not to mention the likelihood of some brands using bot services to upvote favorable content for them. Are admins ready for that? It's a big forum.
This is just an example but it can easily be extrapolated to other examples and it's not hard to see how this could be a problem from a logical standpoint.
I don't see it that way, and am glad there is no "downvote." The posts that, to continue your example, extoll choices other than Mesa will still be visible and the opinions expressed therein are still available for any interested parties to read. Those interested in simply following majority opinion can easily do so by sorting by "vote," and those interested in deeper discussion or potentially more "expert" opinions can read deeper into the thread or sort chronologically. Win/win, as far as I can see. Downvoting seems like a much more active way of silencing people, which is what you're objecting to if I read your post correctly.
I think it will help when someone gives a factually accurate answer. People are more likely to mark that than an opinion.
What an authoritarian statement. You should relax, it's not a big deal.
I think it's relevant and useful. You think it's "flawed", good for you. To each his own.
Ignore it if you don't like it.
I'm afraid voter fraud will become rampant.
Seriously, I think the times when this would prove useful would be few and far between. I'd much rather see all posts in context. There can be much to learn from posts that won't necessarily get votes.
Seriously, I think the times when this would prove useful would be few and far between. I'd much rather see all posts in context. There can be much to learn from posts that won't necessarily get votes.
Not sure you really know what authoritatian means.
Yes it is flawed. You can agree or disagree of course.
But you don't have to sort by vote. You can though and where I think this will be choice is when you're searching for, say, the best tort for metal and you find a thread with 20 pages of replies. If you sort by vote, you can quickly find the top posts in the pages of replies.