So why can we see how many ppl rec a post yet not how many unrec

[Rex]

a post? Less than zero just leaves it open to interpretation, which can be bad. Just my 1 cent about this new feature.

[ret5hd]

1. If you think about it, you can't tell how many rec'd a pot either.

Is that +10 a "+10" or a "+15-5"?

[EFerrari]

7. 10 is x-x +10, isn't it?

See, this is why I had to major in English. lol

[Lasher]

15. Pi R round

Cornbread R square.

[Lasher]

2. I think that's a good idea.

:thumbsup:

[Rex]

6. I might read a post that has -386 posts.

You never know, it could just be the village idiots that have ganged up on their favorite target.

[Lasher]

10. Or it might be one of my OPs getting what it deserves.

But for now we are left to guess just how many unrecs you're going to get on this one.

Regardless, I think it's a the unrec feature in general is a good idea so that we can better understand how the majority of us feels. I think that would have to result in a better DU as time goes by.

[Rex]

16. Oh I agree with the unrec idea. Wondered for years why we only

had a rec function. Just ideas popping up in my head as I think about it now it is here. Once again, rec/unrec away people, I think it would actually fine tune what we see here. And ya a lot of people post shit here that deserves massive unrecs, just as a lot of posts need recs because of important topic information.

[DrDan]

24. well - following that logic to its conclusion - do we have a "worst threads" feature

in our future.

If recs lead to "greatest threads" - then why not "worst threads"?

[Aramchek]

3. because people would throw an even bigger fit if they saw how many were unreccing their thread

[Rex]

19. Well let them throw a fit, maybe they need a reality check.

[cwydro]

20. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[BlooInBloo]

4. Because Skinner said so...

This has been another episode of Simple Answers To Simple Questions.

[MineralMan]

5. Wait....What? You mean Skinner makes the decisions on

his own site? Oh. OK.

[Uben]

11. Yes! Don't piss him off either.....

....or he'll send you nude pictures of his cat. Not a pretty site!

[MineralMan]

17. No way...the howwow!

[EFerrari]

8. I can see pros and cons. If a post is too far in a ditch,

maybe people who would have voted for it won't or, conversely, maybe people will get into a struggle over the numbers instead of talking about the post. Showing only the 0 invites you to overlook either situation, sort of.

[Rex]

9. True but sometimes a post with a lot of unrecs might be getting hits

because of its controversial issues. I'm not to big on the topic one way or the other. Just a curious thought. I can see what you are saying; 0 does invite you to be blind to their actual situation.

[EFerrari]

12. You're right. -387 recs would be something I'd probably want to see. n/t

[Lasher]

14. Well if they do like Rex suggests, just watch for my next OP

All hail Lasher, king of unrecs!

[EFerrari]

23. I haven't even seen you posting OPs in GD.

Are your threads coming pre-un-rec'd? :hi:

[Lasher]

31. You have to be quick.

Every one sinks like Titanic. :-(

Good to see ya around.

[leftstreet]

13. ThiS was MasterMinded to get 1000s of DUers to Click on The GreatesT Page

There are electrodes running directly between The Greatest Page and Admin private parts/naughty bits, and each time we click on the page...it "does" things to them

ASK YOURSELF! Did you ever go to The Greatest Page before this???

SCREEN CAP MY POST NOW!!!!1111

:tinfoilhat: :hide: :tinfoilhat: :hide: :tinfoilhat: :hide:

[Rex]

18. Holyshit, you know I didn't!

I just hit LBN and GD! But now I am CONCERNED about the TGP!!! :rofl:

[scarletwoman]

21. I want pictures.

:evilgrin:

[EarlG]

22. That is absolute

BZZZZZZZZZT!!!!!

Excuse me.

What was I saying?

[leftstreet]

32. pervert

:o

[frog92969]

25. Instead of "<0 votes"

It should be :

+10/-13 = -3

[SidDithers]

26. You can't see how many people rec a post...nt

Sid

[EFerrari]

27. You can deduce it, though.

[cwydro]

28. How can you deduce it?

I have recced an OP that has <0 and it shows no change.

So how can I know how many others recced it? All I can tell is more unrecs than recs have been recorded.

[SidDithers]

29. No, you can only see the difference between recs and unrecs...

anything more than that is purely a guess.

Sid

[EFerrari]

30. That's right. I misunderstood you. n/t