MyFlags

April 19, 2007 7:07 AM

I get lovely positive feedback with favorites, but unless somebody says something negative, I don't really know when I've been naughty. How about a My Flags page?
posted by and hosted from Uranus to Feature Requests at 7:07 AM (39 comments total)

Like, say, a page that shows the last ten posts or comments of mine that have been flagged and the total number of flags received. Not who flagged it or (maybe) what category they chose ('fantastic post' probably shouldn't count), just an aggregate total. As in My Comments, only I would see my flags, of course.

Perhaps it would cut down on people posting metatalk threads asking about a deletion.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 7:08 AM on April 19, 2007

consider this negative feedback for making this post
posted by caddis at 7:16 AM on April 19, 2007 [2 favorites]

I predict that if this was implemented, we would see a whole slew of MetatTalk threads complaining that a post or comment didn't have enough flags to warrant deletion.
posted by amro at 7:16 AM on April 19, 2007

People who post dumbass, flag-worthy comments (offensive comments, derail, noise or otherwise) know they are doing it. Do they really need a tribute page for their idiocy?

I'm sure everyone posts the odd derailing or noisy comment every now and then. If it isn't intentional chances are their volume of flagged comments isn't high enough to necessitate such a feature.

For people who intentional repeat-offenders, a feature like this would just serve as a tool for them in testing the limits.
posted by necessitas at 7:17 AM on April 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

Hmm, I thought the private page would attenuate the 'king of the shitpile' thing. Perhaps not enough though.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 7:21 AM on April 19, 2007

I like it when my comments get deleted, because it means someone noticed me.

I think I would feel the same way about being able to see flags on my posts.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 7:24 AM on April 19, 2007

I don't think the idea is to allow people to see each other's flags, but rather a way for people to see how their doing flag-wise. I'm not sure if it's that good of an idea, though.
posted by delmoi at 7:31 AM on April 19, 2007

Sure, a troll might get some jollies on seeing his underwear run up the flag pole. Maybe we could cap it with a generic "more than 5 flags" message or something.

But it just seems like we have a good feedback system that is only half implemented. A person who wished to get along better in the community could sincerely find the flag data useful towards that end.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 7:34 AM on April 19, 2007

Flagged
posted by poppo at 7:35 AM on April 19, 2007

I think this would be a bad idea. If you're getting flagged to a problematic degree, you're probably going to hear from an admin; barring that, live with the mystery.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:36 AM on April 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

Whether flag results are visible to the community or not seems like a side issue, when the real problem is perhaps that repeat offenders who shit in threads are emboldened by not having their comments removed, or by having a vocal minority defend them when they are rightly called out.

If a comment is removed and you think it was made in good faith, contacting the administrators would seem like the next step.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:37 AM on April 19, 2007

Pretending the internet is real-life works very well as a behavioral barometer. Would you say what you typed to a room full of people? Do you want to get your ass kicked by 43,000 people just to get a chuckle from those other coupla assholes? Well, there you go. Those assholes just chuckle again for ass-kickings.
posted by carsonb at 7:40 AM on April 19, 2007

Mal idea. All this would do is lead to more self-important MeTa freakouts by gripers who lack the balls to properly flame out.

But I would like the right to take the deposition of the mod makes whichever decisions I or my clients disagree with. We need to expose the extraordinary rendition of comments to the healing daylight of legal inquiry!!!!
posted by kosem at 7:40 AM on April 19, 2007

Not crazy about the idea, but I've flagged this post as awesome—I just like to read the words "posted by and hosted from Uranus".

Can't wait til they change the name to Urectum
posted by Mister_A at 7:55 AM on April 19, 2007

Are there huge, fun meetups in your area that someone neglected to inform you of?

Are you sure?
posted by hermitosis at 7:56 AM on April 19, 2007

This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Smart Dalek at 7:57 AM on April 19, 2007

Okey doke.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 8:04 AM on April 19, 2007

Do what I do. Just assume anything you post is gonna piss some crackpot off. It's an occupational hazard.
posted by Dave Faris at 8:30 AM on April 19, 2007 [1 favorite]

I'd be willing to give anyone who asks all the negative feedback they could possibly want.
posted by OmieWise at 8:33 AM on April 19, 2007

One the one hand, I do think "commenting" is an excellent way of letting someone know that we think something they've said is stupid (although sometimes I don't have the energy, have nothing to really add to the discussion, but just loathe something someone has said).

Although this does lead nicely to my pony: wouldn't it be nice to mark if a comment was in response to another comment, so someone could easily see if their comment had spawned a bunch of replies? I'm not seeing this as devolving meta into something threaded or nested like slashdot et al; just a way to know that someone thought something you said was dumb without having to search for your name or snippets of what you've typed.
posted by Deathalicious at 8:38 AM on April 19, 2007

I would love it if logged in users could hover over a comment/post and see how many times it was flagged (for negative reasons), the catch being that this info would be displayed to everyone EXCEPT the post/comment author. I am not actually suggesting this feature, it serves no purpose other than to spite the thread crappers who, as Mr. president . . .America pointed out, are very motivated by the attention. Now that I think about it, I am sure those same members have sock puppet accounts (and sock puppets for their sock puppets), enabling them to log in and see how many times their post was flagged.
posted by necessitas at 8:38 AM on April 19, 2007

This thread needs more low pass filter.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:41 AM on April 19, 2007

wouldn't it be nice to mark if a comment was in response to another comment, so someone could easily see if their comment had spawned a bunch of replies?

Respectfully, I think that's missing the point. You find out if your comment has spawned a bunch of replies by reading thoroughly. If someone can't be arsed to do that as a matter of practice, I can see no reason to encourage them.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:43 AM on April 19, 2007

I admit that I often look for the corresponding "-" next to the "+". And it's almost always the same five or ten asshats who just HAVE to post five, ten, fifteen posts a thread. What are we supposed to use, man, harsh language?

No, I don't really have a point.
posted by norm at 9:04 AM on April 19, 2007

I predict that if this was implemented, we would see a whole slew of MetatTalk threads complaining that a post or comment didn't have enough flags to warrant deletion.

Indeed, and the comparisons would never end.

"This comment had 8 flags and got deleted, and that one has 9. Why wasn't it deleted, huh? HUH?"

I think the moderation is somehwat capricious around here, but even I don't want to see it become a numbers game.
posted by scarabic at 9:04 AM on April 19, 2007

Why don't you just flag your own churlish comments then favorite them. That way you can keep track of when you're being an ass bucket.
posted by French Fry at 9:17 AM on April 19, 2007

I am okay with this as long as you can't see who flagged you.

Because that would lead to bad things.
posted by empath at 9:42 AM on April 19, 2007

I had my first deleted comment (that I know of) yesterday. I quit smoking two days ago. Those two things are not unrelated.
posted by Bookhouse at 11:08 AM on April 19, 2007

A "my deleted comments" page might be fun!
posted by Mister_A at 11:31 AM on April 19, 2007

These are not mutually exclusive. One of my deleted comments had seven favorites.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 12:03 PM on April 19, 2007

I'd like a "My Humps" page where I can see the details of my lovely lady bumps.

Check it out.
posted by GuyZero at 3:04 PM on April 19, 2007

*screams*
posted by cortex (staff) at 3:14 PM on April 19, 2007

Do what you want, but tonight y'all gotta go to KFC.
Dizzy's kitchen is CLOSED.
I'm airing out some perky little Sav B, putting my feet up, and sucking up to a Partagas Negro Oscuro.
Might be some Jeno's PizzaBites in the freezer, if you're jonesing.
posted by Dizzy at 4:25 PM on April 19, 2007

I argued vociferously, way back when, when flagging was implemented, that silent deletion is bad for community and conversation. I still think that is true, in principle, and I think that a significant part the reason for rampant sockpuppetry (provided I'm correct about how many there actually are) can be traced right back to that single decision.

But I'm not too worried about it. These days, I'd rather see more deletion of gimmick comment posting and noise than less, even if it is silent, to be honest.

One of the canonical reasons given for silent deletion is to discourage 'king of the shitpile' behaviour. Although there is something to be said for that, on the other hand, anyone who strives to be such should just be outright banned, and then everybody wins. Seems like an obvious solution.

But again: *shrugs*

The system isn't that broken, but when (as we have recently) we see daily 200 or 300+ comment Metatalk threads mostly composed of shits and giggles, it seems as we might be getting some amplitude distortion.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:00 PM on April 19, 2007

i give this post 5 flags ):
posted by exlotuseater at 6:23 PM on April 19, 2007

Can we just start calling favorites "bookmarks" now?
posted by absalom at 4:27 AM on April 20, 2007

I WILL EAT YOUR SOUL.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:20 AM on April 20, 2007

One of the canonical reasons given for silent deletion is to discourage 'king of the shitpile' behaviour. Although there is something to be said for that, on the other hand, anyone who strives to be such should just be outright banned

I completely agree. Methinks les Mods don't want to have to go up against another popular uprising ala "Free Quonsar," though. It's characters who surf the line between being genuinely funny but frequently crossing the line who make this a hard situation. If you want to ban people who frequently cross the line, you have to be ready to show some very popular characters the door. That can be majorly controversial.
posted by scarabic at 10:03 AM on April 20, 2007

Well, the silent deletion thing worries me somewhat for much the same reasons as it does Mr Wonderchicken and I think that people should not be encouraged to see MeFi as a place where you can participate via drive-by - if you want to be part of the conversation, then be part of the conversation. However, there are enough people around who would see negative flags as little badges of honour to make this a problematic suggestion.
posted by dg at 8:39 PM on April 22, 2007