Is expressing one's opinion with a poor topic rating rather than an answer a cowardly thing to do?
1. |
 |
||
2. |
 |
||
3. |
 |
||
 |
Add a new answer! |
Page 1 of 1
Topic Details
This topic was started by Odocoileus 
on March 13th, 2008. 27 grupies have voted on one or more of the 3 answers.
Tags: grupthink
Comments |
Leave a comment
It will be interesting to see how low this one does or does not go. . .
I expect a lot of poor topic reaction rating, mostly for the sake of irony.
The ratings include "poorly said" and "boring". These are opinion ratings. If you are against opinion ratings, maybe you should petition for the admins to change the ratings to only include technical ratings such as "Rated R/X" or maybe "Illegible".
As long as "poorly said" and "boring" are options they are legitimate ways to express one's regard for the topic.
I wish we still had lame. :sniff: I miss it.
Hey, can anyone who has left a comment tell me exactly what this topic means? It looks like a fragmented run-on sentence and I still can't figure it out.
its cowardly ;)
Should one add a negative answer instead of modding down the topic. The logic being, I gather, that you don't have to put your name to a mod, thus being "cowardly".
If you expressed your opinion, you couldn't do it with a poor topic rating, because not having already expressed it, you wouldn't have received a poor topic rating. Giving an answer seems a brave thing, not a cowardly thing, to do. Can someone explain this to me?
With anonymity one cannot demand satisfaction for a personal affront, even on as small as a mod rating.
@ Skrrriti
Unlike our current system of honor duels. ;)
I think some topics which are neither boring or poorly said are rated as such because they imply unpopular opinions. If I disagree with an opinion, I'll either debate it or ignore it.
There's plenty of boring and poorly said topics which imply no opinion -- with which I can use to verify my cred level.
Boring and poorly said are highly subjective though. For example, i could read a well articulated and properly typed article supporting the existence of big-foot. Yet because it uses unfounded assumptions and logical fallacies I would mark t as "poorly said".
If someone makes an eloquent speech regarding why traditional medicine is a big conspiracy using argument that have been rehashed and debunked time and again I would certainly mar it as "boring".
They are highly subjective labels.
Friar0: I agree fully with your comment. My criteria for well-said include sound and logical argument as well being expressed coherently.
On the other hand, I've seen reasonable questions (and answers) modded down significantly for no "logical" reason. I can only assume that folks disliked or disagreed with it in some way, and punished with cred demerits.
For what it's worth, answers that are solely an opinion about the quality of the topic are totally irrelevant - That's what comments are for.
See also: http://www.grupthink.com/topic/11837