There has been a lot of talk about red dots these days - far more than you would expect from a forum full of what is primarily adults, most of whom have the intelligence to support Caley Thistle - and it is clear we need to change how we do this. I get mail about this all the time and it constantly amazes me that some folk get their jollies by red dotting someone because of who they are or how they will react rather than the post itself, or that someone who knows their post is somewhat controversial or goes against the grain gets outraged themselves when a flurry of red dots appear. 

Ultimately, the decision will lie with myself and the moderators as it is us who have to deal with some of the childish actions and re-actions of those who dish them out and who receive them but there are basically three choices available to us that I am considering recommending to the mods.   

1. Facebook style "like" system. 
2. Maintain current system but allow users to see who voted them up/down. 
3. Allow positive votes only. 

The 4th option (allowing negative votes only) is not on the table. We have previously used the like system and this does work but we have never used the 'positive votes only' or the option to make all voting visible to all users so not sure about these. I welcome feedback from everyone - provided it is constructive - and will make a decision in conjunction with the mods in due course.  

My tuppenceworth.

I would support option 2 whereby a poster could see who has given them green or red dots. Wasn't our system like this years ago?  I'm not a 'red dotter', having only given a handful in over 10 years on this site, but I would guess the frequent users of 'red dots' might think twice if posters could see who had 'red dotted' them. Mods could easily see if someone was being unfairly picked on, and take whatever sanctions they felt appropriate.

Alternatively, scrap them altogether (both green and red) and leave posters to reply to a post they strongly supported or disagreed with.

There are some posts where I expect red dots . Personally I have never red dotted anyone. I have responded in a post. If you do not like something that you read then it is fair enuff to red dot but you also have to give a rationale. Is there a red dot league table ?  or better still an erseholes who red dot league table ?

People frothing at the mouth because of red dots on a football forum? Dear me, do people not have better things to do?

Option 2 would be my preference. 

I give green more than red I think but Im more than happy to have my name alongside those I dish out 

Do a poll?

Option two for me although it might introduce 'revenge dotting' I guess.

you ask for constructive feedback and of course the 'usual suspects' red dot your post. Thanks Dougal. 

I have no idea what the facebook like system is but as someone who has collected lots of red dots ( I think I got 7 + for suggesting we didn't need stokes and his IRA baggage, astonishing, even Celtic were embarassed by his behaviour) it would be more helpful to know who and why they issued them and then have an opportunity to engage them in a conversation as to why a comment was made or the rational behind it ie back it up, as a relative newcomer to the site over a couple of years but a much older supporter of the club, my opinion is that too many follow the herd, that is, the comments of those with lots of greenies next to their name rather than thinking for themselves, then again, that's just the human condition, after all, why do they issue the results of opinion poles which they know to be untrue and unrepresentative of the majority? because some people always want to be with the majority and will change their vote, it's much safer there. Go on give me some reds I have broad shoulders.

Go for 2 I've got no issue with putting my my name to a colored dot on a football forum. 

Can't think who the clipe might be.

Why not put a name to green dots as well as red.

Isn't option 1 & 3 the same.

Option 2 is ok but could potentially lead to cyber bullying when a poster constantly gets red dots from the same people.  The bully could be sanctioned but it's a reactive solution. 

However a lot of negativity will creep in if you can post what you want with no negative feed back.

Just keep it as it is but limit their use.

If you show for the red you also show for the green then you see who's pals with who.

 

 

Option two for me! Way more fun.

I do think people should be able to express their disagreement without always being expected to argue the case. Some posts are simply out of order in one way or another and the number of negative marks allows people to gauge the strength of feeling without people needing to respond. But the red dotters should be identifiable so that they can be identified just as the poster who they are criticising can be. 

One thing that is annoying about the current system is that you just see a net reputation for a post.  There is no way for anyone other than the poster to know how many positive and negative votes they got        .  For instance, a post could have 10 green and 10 red dots but with the current system you would not know that anyone had been bothered to like or dislike it at all.  I'm not sure whether option 2 would show who expressed both likes and dislikes but if it does, it would have my vote.  It would allow people to see the extent of interest in a particular post.

 

 

 

Keep it as it is and increase number of red dots you can give in a day....I'm fed up of running out of them!!

Would I be right in saying that switching to option 2 (showing who awarded the dots), would actually be applied retrospectively, ie people who issued dots in the past on the understanding that it was anonymous would now find that they have all been made public?

14 minutes ago, CaleyD said:

Keep it as it is and increase number of red dots you can give in a day....I'm fed up of running out of them!!

Is there a limit ?

Option 3 --only positive posts.

This excludes those who for some reason or another have a compulsive desire to put down other peoples' thoughts. Forces, as a replacement, that they type their thoughts up front and allows the other online posters to decide  to answer or not. i.e then we have a real debate in full view and not hidden nastiness like red dotting everything that you dislike, or maybe just to hurt the other guy in an ANONYMOUS way,  which will continue to happen if red dotting is allowed to continue.

Removes negativity from the site and replaces it by forcing people to think positive and upbeat or just fade away. If I like (or dislike)  another poster's thinking then I can still post my thoughts but give a green dot too to show others who don't have the time to read everything that people care about that particular posting a lot.

The only red dots that I want to see this weekend is a pointless Aberdire walking off the pitch.

Just stick with the status quo, but its almost an irrelevance - does it matter whether a comment is liked or not? This is a football forum, its not some kind of online contest and there are no prizes for getting the most 'greens' and certainly if individuals feel 'reds' are a personal attack or affecting their lives then perhaps a grown up adult platform such as this or even the interweb isn't the best place to be using.

Leave as is, remove altogether, but I'd refrain from anything that involves investing time to resolve or put in place, I would suggest there is a high percentage on here like myself who just don't care - if its there we may use it, if not so be it. Changing things will not do anything other than give those already unhappy a new angle to be unhappy about.

 

Seems like most people are ambivalent and don't take it too seriously.

Maybe some of those who aren't happy with it could explain why. 

20 hours ago, 12th Man said:

Isn't option 1 & 3 the same.

Yes, essentially

 

20 hours ago, 12th Man said:

Option 2 is ok but could potentially lead to cyber bullying when a poster constantly gets red dots from the same people.  The bully could be sanctioned but it's a reactive solution. 

We do look at this already when we see a pattern emerge.  

 

20 hours ago, 12th Man said:

However a lot of negativity will creep in if you can post what you want with no negative feed back.

My personal opinion is that sometimes you do need the option to be negative about something, especially if you disagree ! everything is not all sweetness and light !

 

20 hours ago, 12th Man said:

Just keep it as it is but limit their use.

We already do that. Most user groups can give out unlimited positive votes per day but we restrict the negatives from 0-10 depending on your member status and those who we feel have abused the system have the option to red dot anyone removed.  

 

20 hours ago, 12th Man said:

If you show for the red you also show for the green then you see who's pals with who.

the permission is on or off and shows both red and green not just red or green. 

4 hours ago, bdu98196 said:

Just stick with the status quo, but its almost an irrelevance - does it matter whether a comment is liked or not? This is a football forum, its not some kind of online contest and there are no prizes for getting the most 'greens' and certainly if individuals feel 'reds' are a personal attack or affecting their lives then perhaps a grown up adult platform such as this or even the interweb isn't the best place to be using.

Leave as is, remove altogether, but I'd refrain from anything that involves investing time to resolve or put in place, I would suggest there is a high percentage on here like myself who just don't care - if its there we may use it, if not so be it. Changing things will not do anything other than give those already unhappy a new angle to be unhappy about.

Hope you dont mind but I green dotted this one  

There is little time involved in implementing any of the options but my concern is that we get into all sorts of bickering and arguing if we get "red dot wars" starting. I am open to trying any of the available options on this site but anything (or anyone) that causes constant grief or negatively impacts my own time or that of the mods who volunteer their time to help run the site is just not worth having on the site.   

20 hours ago, caleyboy said:

Why not put a name to green dots as well as red.

if we enable it you see both. its on or off, nothing in between. 

 

18 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Would I be right in saying that switching to option 2 (showing who awarded the dots), would actually be applied retrospectively, ie people who issued dots in the past on the understanding that it was anonymous would now find that they have all been made public?

That is my understanding. yes. and to be fair we never once made the assertion that any aspect of our reputation system (ie. likes, or green/red dots) is/was or always would be anonymous.  

 

18 hours ago, 12th Man said:

Is there a limit ?

Yes. see post 2 above this one. 

Honestly, in my opinion, if you want voting, leave it as it is. I've had many years of experience (admittedly fewer years than the admins here) running forums and other communities for various video games with moderate success and I can't help but feel if we at the time were to open up the voting and allow users to see who is upvoting or downvoting, it would lead to more friction. 

There are realistically only two suitable options:
 

1. Keep voting, but hide user information as to allow someone to disagree with a comment without having to create a reply to explain why.
2. Abolish voting, forcing those who disagree to come forth and write a reply as to why they disagree with a comment thus creating more discussion, but also opening up your forum to low quality posts. 

Trolls will be trolls. Cyberbullies (in the case of downvoting a username regardless of the content or quality of their contribution) will be cyberbullies and groups will always form. Don't let things get more personal as this will just cause more upset. 

EDIT: I would also like to add that in my opinion, it's rather embarrassing that it's come this far, for both the community and the club that we all support. 

Edited September 7, 20169 yr by TheCommissioner