This is a sidebar to this, but I'm curious what other people think. I recevied this comment (along with a disapproval) on an answer I had posted:

opinions should not be rated; as you did...Your opinion is just that, an opinion.

Not getting into the fact that I disagree that my answer was purely opinion, but do other people think this sentiment is correct? Can't opinions be valid or invalid? Shouldn't opinions be based on facts and/or logic? Are opinions just opinions, especially when they are backed up with explanation of fact and/or logic? If an opinion has no valid basis, or misinterprets or spins the data, can't it be "disapproved" of?

Thoughts?

Scott<>

OK, just brainstorming...

Any user can rate a post as Positive. Affirmations of good advice are a good thing.

As for rating them Negative, though: Maybe this should be limited to people who have posted in that thread. In other words, if one is willing to say a post is wrong, bad, negative or whatever, then he should 1. put his own reputation on the line and post his "better, more complete, etc. answer... which should also benefit the asker if he truly has something beneficial to add.

Then the user could, if he desires, rate a previous answer as Negative.

Mechanics aside, does the philosophy of the idea make sense?

Rick,
Yes it does. Until Admin can adjust things so we can display the comments with the Note, this makes good sense.

However, I'm not clear if you answered the question. Should opinions be subject to rating, whether positive or negative?

Scott<>

I could go either way on that end of it.

I know that Answerway does a form of that, but one thing I don't like about the way it's done there is that it seems like the comments on the ratings are like a "side discussion" of their own. It just goes too far, I think, in allowing the armchair philosophers to go on and on and on.

Dump the thing, the sooner the better. There is no way to keep a clique of lightweights from posting and posting, and then rating each other to inflate their reputations? Then there is the matter of rating answers in areas you are a complete dummy. I never used Windows much and know little about it. Still, I am free to go into the computer area and rate posts most of which involve windows and other software I know little about.

I deserve a strong reputation in dogs because of my work with the top professionals the last 15 years. When it comes to caring for dogs and socializing young puppies, nobody here comes close. Why should somebody that is at most an ordinary dog owner, be allowed to rate an answer to a question they didn't ask?

There are some other areas, I at least know enough to help. I may not have the answer in many cases, but can help the asker figure it out. I continue to struggle in Heating and Cooling because I don't see many other answers there, and nobody else is doing better. I largely abandoned plumbing because Tom's answers looked so much better than mine.

If some lightweight manages to give a good answer in dogs, plumbing, computers, I think anybody familiar with the site is still want to know what Labman, Tom, Scott, etc. thinks. A simple check on Approve won't do it.

ok, just brainstorming...

Any user can rate a post as Positive. Affirmations of good advice are a good thing.

As for rating them Negative, though: Maybe this should be limited to people who have posted in that thread. In other words, if one is willing to say a post is wrong, bad, negative or whatever, then he should 1. put his own reputation on the line and post his "better, more complete, etc. answer...which should also benefit the asker if he truly has something beneficial to add.

Then the user could, if he desires, rate a previous answer as Negative.

Mechanics aside, does the philosophy of the idea make sense?Yes, this is what I meant about honesty - when rating negatively, you should at least state why right in the post and not hide behind a disapproval that other's cannot see. No matter how long it takes, weeks or months, I'm sure you will come up with an amiable solution.

You guys are not answering my question. ::sniff::

I've just noticed that comments now appear at the bottom of posts! Looks good!


https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=14425

Rick,
Yes it does. Until Admin can adjust things so we can display the comments with the Note, this makes good sense.

However, I'm not clear if you answered the question. Should opinions be subject to rating, whether positive or negative?

Scott<> Hi scott - I have no say-so in this, but my opinion is 'let's go for the whole thing' - After all, practice makes perfect and we can always go back to the 'drawing board'. I also feel that those few who oppose to it have something to hide, so let's get real here.

All of our answers come from the heart, experience, logic, and just plain wanting to help others. If this is not enough to get rated on and we are all only human, then it's time to move on to another..

Hi,
I agree with Chery. We are here to help, and if it's rated; OK; if not, still OK if we have helped someone.
Opinions are held by all; those asking questions, answers, voters opinions, etc.
The problem with ratings, based strictly on anothers' opinion, can and does, result in the argument extending on and on and on... turning it into a "war of words", simply because the argument (or clarifications, for a better word), is based on opinions, such as Gov't, Politics, Religion, etc. Discussions are never ending over these types of opinions. One definition of "opinion" is that it's a statement made without proof or backed up with facts. To be fair to the person answering a question with an "opinion", the person could be asked for the facts, then rate those facts!
If an answer given is wrong in steps to take to correct an issue, then of course, it should be rated badly, with a reason why.
If an answer given is an opinion, as to the best operating computer system, or the best way to defrag, or the best way to get back a girlfriend, or train a dog, that is an opinion. It shouldn't be rated badly because it is an opinion. There are many, many different ways to solve an issue in most cases, and in most categories.
We all agree that we can disagree, but ratings based on an "opinion" can, again, become so long a thread that most soon just call it quits, and move on to better time-consuming help for others.

Now, just for thought, should any answers to this posting by ScottGem be given a bad rating for any of these opinions?

Hi,
I agree with Chery.

One definition of "opinion" is that it's a statement made without proof or backed up with facts.

If an answer given is an opinion, as to the best operating computer system, or the best way to defrag, or the best way to get back a girlfriend, or train a dog, that is an opinion. It shouldn't be rated badly because it is an opinion. There are many, many different ways to solve an issue in most cases, and in most categories.

Interesting, you say you agree with Chery, but her opinion was 'let's go for the whole thing' meaning rate anything. You then go on to say you disagree with rating opinions.

I'm curious where you got that definition. My Merriam Webster says nothing about being without proof. In my experience opinions are based on some facts, or logic or experience. Anyone who forms and expresses an opinion that they can't support with facts and/or logic should NOT be expressing that opinion. Those are the types of opinions that should be rated badly.

I do agree that some opinions are in the eye of the beholder and a case can be made for both sides of such opinions. I personally would not rate such an opinion. But an opinion with nothing to back it up is subject to disagreement.

Scott<>

Dump the thing, the sooner the better. There is no way to keep a clique of lightweights from posting and posting, and then rating each other to inflate their reputations? Then there is the matter of rating answers in areas you are a complete dummy. I never used Windows much and know little about it. still, I am free to go into the computer area and rate posts most of which involve windows and other software I know little about.

I deserve a strong reputation in dogs because of my work with the top professionals the last 15 years. When it comes to caring for dogs and socializing young puppies, nobody here comes close. Why should somebody that is at most an ordinary dog owner, be allowed to rate an answer to a question they didn't ask?

There are some other areas, I at least know enough to help. I may not have the answer in many cases, but can help the asker figure it out. I continue to struggle in Heating and Cooling because I don't see many other answers there, and nobody else is doing better. I largely abandoned plumbing because Tom's answers looked so much better than mine.

If some lightweight manages to give a good answer in dogs, plumbing, computers, I think anybody familiar with the site is still want to know what Labman, Tom, Scott, etc. thinks. A simple check on Approve won't do it. Thanks for leaving my name out, but we all know who you meant by 'dummy'. At least I stated in the post when answering that I did not know anything about MAC, but thought it worked on the same principal. I kept my cool long enough until I read this post - and I think your ego is a little inflated referring to others as a clique of lightweights. I respect your experience with dogs and never would question you in your area of expertise, but if you made an honest guess, I would not have the audacity to claim you were a dummy as I don't know you that well and really would like the same respect in return from now on, if you don't mind. Thank you!

Not getting into the fact that I disagree that my answer was purely opinion, but do other people think this sentiment is correct? Can't opinions be valid or invalid? Shouldn't opinions be based on facts and/or logic? Are opinions just opinions, especially when they are backed up with explanation of fact and/or logic? If an opinion has no valid basis, or misinterprets or spins the data, can't it be "disapproved" of?
I think there are opinions which can be valid or invalid and there are some that cannot be said to be nor valid nor invalid.

For example, I may have an opinion about my car that it can't go any faster than 100mph. But my opinion would prove wrong if I tried it.

For another example, imagine someone logging on this forum in Autos&Trucks forum, and asking a question like this: "My car won't start...what could it be?". I could log on and say: "It could be your gas tank is empty.". From the given information, my opinion cannot be rated as false, since the asker didn't bother enough to give enough information. Then again, if I said: "You have a bad haircut, and that's why your car won't start!", then my opinion should be rated as bad, since it has nothing to do with the problem.

I believe opinions can be sorted into following categories:
- true statements
- false statements
- logical opinions
- dumbass sentences

:)

I think there are opinions which can be valid or invalid and there are some that cannot be said to be nor valid nor invalid.

For example, i may have an opinion about my car that it can't go any faster than 100mph. But my opinion would prove wrong if i tried it.

For another example, imagine someone logging on this forum in Autos&Trucks forum, and asking a question like this: "My car won't start...what could it be?". I could log on and say: "It could be your gas tank is empty.". From the given information, my opinion cannot be rated as false, since the asker didn't bother enough to give enough information. Then again, if i said: "You have a bad haircut, and that's why your car won't start!", then my opinion should be rated as bad, since it has nothing to do with the problem.

I believe opinions can be sorted into following categories:
- true statements
- false statements
- logical opinions
- dumbass sentences

:)Not bad! Where would ill-mannered and/or abusive language fall under? Maybe 'objectionable reply'?

In poking about Point Ask to see just how long it has been since Findley disappeared, I found the profile he posted,
''Judge me by my answers as I can not say who I am. It's a gas to see how my knowledge goes down here when there's not a "name" to go with it. Writing and dogs are my life. Hope this place has a spell check. Jolly regards, Findley''

No begging to be rated. I miss him. It has been almost 2 years, and I haven't had anybody of his caliber to share answering dog questions. Like him, I ask to rated on my answers not this junk rep system.

I think there are opinions which can be valid or invalid and there are some that cannot be said to be nor valid nor invalid.

I believe opinions can be sorted into following categories:
- true statements
- false statements
- logical opinions
- dumbass sentences
:)

Exactly! You put it right in a nutshell.

Scott<>

P.S. I would have just rated this as an agree, but the Spread feature prevented me. I'm beginning to hate that feature.

Exactly! You put it right in a nutshell.

Scott<>

P.S. I would have just rated this as an agree, but the Spread feature prevented me. I'm beginning to hate that feature. The feature is beginning to irritate me also, but " a clique of lightweights " who want to rate more than once could mess things up by acting irrational.:rolleyes:

The feature is beginning to irritate me also, but " a clique of lightweights " who want to rate more than once could mess things up by acting irrational.:rolleyes:

I'm not sure that would happen. If it could be monitored and people who appear to be doing that suspended it would prevent it. I would like to see it given a try. The spread limits could always be reinstated.

Scott<>

One definition of "opinion" is that it's a statement made without proof or backed up with facts.

The more I've thought about this, the dumber this sounds. How does one form an opinion? A human baby is not born with opinions, they are formed as they grow. Opinions don't spring into one's mind out of nothing. They are formed based on teachings, advice and/or experience. Therefore, it would seem impossible for an opinion to not have some proof or facts behind it. Whether the proofs and/or facts have been correctly interpreted or whether they are based on false data is another issue. But to say they have no proofs or factual basis is just ridiculous.

I take my opinions seriously. I don't arrive at a position without careful consideration of the factual or logical basis behind that opinion. Any opinion I state I will stand behind and support with the proofs that were behind my formation of the opinion. That doesn't mean I think I'm always right. If someone can dispute the facts or logic I used, then I'm willing to concede and change my position. That it happens rarely is because I am careful in my consideration of the proofs before I take a stand. I think everyone should be that way.

Scott<>

Very good point. Some opinions are formed with more care, thought, and facts backing them.

The more I've thought about this, the dumber this sounds. How does one form an opinion? A human baby is not born with opinions, they are formed as they grow. Opinions don't spring into one's mind out of nothing. They are formed based on teachings, advice and/or experience. Therefore, it would seem impossible for an opinion to not have some proof or facts behind it. Whether the proofs and/or facts have been correctly interpreted or whether they are based on false data is another issue. But to say they have no proofs or factual basis is just ridiculous.
This just fell on my mind... how do opinions based on "gut feeling" come in play here? I'm not trying to dissapprove of your saying - I agree with it too, but this thing just fell on my mind.

This just fell on my mind...how do opinions based on "gut feeling" come in play here? I'm not trying to dissapprove of your saying - i agree with it too, but this thing just fell on my mind.

The way I look at it your "gut feeling" is based on your experience and/or beliefs. Lets use an example. I consider myself a deist. A deist is someone who believes that some intelligent force created the universe then washed their hands of it and said, go play. I base my beliefs on several factors. One is I can't believe that the complexity of the universe, the physical laws etc. could not be the product of some intelligence. On the other hand, I can't believe such an intelligent could allow the horrors that have occurred within the universe. Obviously I can't prove this. But its based my experiences in dealing with the universe. What I've done here is present a logical basis for my opinion. Whether it can be proven is another issue.

Scott<>

The way I look at it your "gut feeling" is based on your experience and/or beliefs. Lets use an example. I consider myself a deist. A deist is someone who believes that some intelligent force created the universe then washed their hands of it and said, go play. I base my beliefs on several factors. One is I can't believe that the complexity of the universe, the physical laws etc. could not be the product of some intelligence. On the other hand, I can't believe such an intelligent could allow the horrors that have occured within the universe. Obviously I can't prove this. But its based my experiences in dealing with the universe. What I've done here is present a logical basis for my opinion. Whether it can be proven is another issue.

Scott<> Very good Scott and ProCiv. I believe my 'gut feelings' are from the information that I have received through years, weighing this information and coming up with solutions/opinions of my own. Some people have 'anxiety attacks' , forebodings, and precognitions - which to them are valid, even if they cannot be proven by others but it works for them. Ah, the amazing brain. Thank goodness each of us has an opinion as various as another part of our anatomy.. What does matter is the respect we all should have for other's opinions too, and when wrong - how we can face up to them and learn.. after all we are all human and not perfect, otherwise this would be a boring planet to live on.

As I thought about this some more, I realized it is possible for people to have opinions that they form based on unconscious datum. This is where the gut feeling comes in. I'm sure there is some logical basis for the feeling, but they would need to think about it carefully to be able to express what it is. But I remain convinced that any opinion has some factual and/or logical basis.

I also remain convinced that if people want to express their opinions, they should be willing and able to back up the opinion. They should also be willing to change their opinion in the face of contrary evidence. To just state an opinion then clam up when its challenged is very wrong In my opinion.

Scott<>

As I thought about this some more, I realized it is possible for people to have opinions that they form based on unconscious datum. This is where the gut feeling comes in. I'm sure there is some logical basis for the feeling, but they would need to think about it carefully to be able to express what it is. But I remain convinced that any opinion has some factual and/or logical basis.

I also remain convinced that if people want to express their opinions, they should be willing and able to back up the opinion. They should also be willing to change their opinion in the face of contrary evidence. To just state an opinion then clam up when its challenged is very wrong IMHO.

Scott<> I agree again, got the 'spread' message, one should not clam up or ignore repercussions - not cosher at all, that's the coward's way out.

Wow, I did not know what a deist was but it sums up what I have been thinking for the last few years, did not know it had a following.

I think these posts(although interesting and enlightening) has kind of strayed from what the question was. If you ask me if we should keep the rating system, I don't care, one way or another. For instance I like being a newbie and I dislike it, I like it because it means that I don't know anything which I believe I don't, I know nothing for sure, however the word newbie got it's start from online gaming which I am pretty sure I'm the only one to experience that and/or have the deepest connection with it. Newbie in the online gaming world means retard, stupid, and ignorant, so on that note I am not too happy about it, but really I don't think I mind, I think it is nice maybe to reward someone for good advice but shouldn't the real reward be that we helped somebody and that acknowledgement for it is irrelevant.

Is there anybody out there that thinks the rep system helped them choose the better of 2 conflicting answers?

I think these posts(although interesting and enlightening) has kind of strayed from what the question was. If you ask me if we should keep the rating system, I don't care, one way or another. For instance I like being a newbie and I dislike it, I like it because it means that I don't know anything which I believe I don't, I know nothing for sure, however the word newbie got it's start from online gaming which I am pretty sure i'm the only one to experience that and/or have the deepest connection with it. Newbie in the online gaming world means retard, stupid, and ignorant, so on that note I am not too happy about it, but really I don't think I mind, I think it is nice maybe to reward someone for good advice but shouldn't the real reward be that we helped somebody and that acknowledgement for it is irrelevant. Hope you stick to this forum instead of games, as you are an enlightenment and pleasure to read. Keep this up and you won't be a newbie for long.

You're :cool:

I think these posts(although interesting and enlightening) has kind of strayed from what the question was. If you ask me if we should keep the rating system, I don't care, one way or another. For instance I like being a newbie and I dislike it, I like it because it means that I don't know anything which I believe I don't, I know nothing for sure, however the word newbie got it's start from online gaming which I am pretty sure i'm the only one to experience that and/or have the deepest connection with it. Newbie in the online gaming world means retard, stupid, and ignorant, so on that note I am not too happy about it, but really I don't think I mind, I think it is nice maybe to reward someone for good advice but shouldn't the real reward be that we helped somebody and that acknowledgement for it is irrelevant.

The term newbie goes back much further than online gaming. Newbie originally started as a non-derogatory id for someone new to the environment. It was simple a way to gauge a person's experience. The newbie title shown under a posters name here, reflects nothing more than a tier showing the number of posts they have made. As posts increase, that title changes. But because its based solely on quantity and not quality, some people feel there needs to be something that is more based on quality.

Personally, my issue is primarily with the ability to rate and comment on individual posts. I have a feeling that the Repuation system is tied into that in such way that you can't have one without the other. So I would rather live with a Rep system then without a rating system.

Scott<>

That's a good point ^^^, however I misworded my original statement, I shouldn't have said started by online gamers, however I do believe that it is more common to hear it now because of the gaming, but like I said I think a rating system is irrelevant, because I think it is very depressing to know someone gets their jollies by trying to get a higher rank, when it's the good advice to people in need that deserves our concentration.

however I misworded my original statement, I shouldn't have said started by online gamers, however I do belive that it is more common to hear it now because of the gaming,

I must disagree again. You are relatively new to the Internet. I've been using it for longer than you have been around. I suspect that the lion's share of your Internet usage involves gaming. So its natural that you would look at things through that perspective. But out in the rest of cyberspace, newbie is a common term.

Scott<>

Great question

I guess you could call me new, and I really mean that ,no sarcaism, I started on the internet in 1998, and I know it has been around longer than that, and I just realized the mistake I made, of course the word newbie has been around longer, that was so shortsighted of me, the word I meant was "noob" and I really doubt, but who knows, that was used frequently before Halo 2 got off the ground, but I have been proven wrong, before, actually a lot lol, and it isn't necessarily a internet thing, it is an xbox live thing which does use the internet to conncect yet it's run through a console instead of a computer. But like I said, I meant noob, and how I realize that know I don't know and it is most likely because I quit the game around 2 months ago, and I haven't use that lingo since. Also, I have another question, when did the internet start? I know when the first computer was distributed, but I am kind of fuzzy about when the world wide web was started?

Sorry Whizz, but its been around a lot longer than online console games

3. noob
comes in two variations, noob and newb.

Noob is meant as an offensive term towards someone who is not nessicarily new, and quite often is directed at someone that is |somewhat| experienced but at the same time stupid/disruptive and/or totally incapable of learning.
A noob is almost always someone who thinks they're cool but obviously aren't. Also used in 1337speak.
see also: n00b, nub, ch00b, n00bo, n00blet.

Newb is not meant to be offensive. newb merely states that the person in question is new to the game/board/whatever.
Noob -
Ralph: OMG I IS THE BEST!11!!one1!!! YUO ALL SUK!11! LOL!
Fred: noob.
Daniel: go home n00blet...

Noob Link (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=noob)