I would recommend a suggestion to identify anyone voting down a suggestion as I see this as a sly way of being detrimental to the community and personages within that community.
It has already been by Timo and others including myself that such behavior is unwarrented. Now I believe we need a way to see who this people are so we can help them identify their issues and come to terms with them.
We do not track that data, so that is not possible.
The idea to get rid of the down vote has been brought up often, resulting in only a Like button.
Perhaps we should have a Foldit vote about this ;-)
So far have not seen only a ' Like ' button, but one possible step might be to disable the ' Down ' button
Yeah, we have only talked about it so far, I was just referring to Facebook's "Like Button":
http://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/like/
Many of us have double or even more nicks certified as voting nicks. so some attention has to be paid to that fact before considering a vote UP or DOWN as a valid count for a Foldit vote. Anonimity in a democracy should be preserved, however rash and inconsiderate use of anonimity to intimidate or control outcome is itself a danger which needs to be considered. A pure count simply by nicks even if the nick seems to be unique is not enough and we all know that IP addresses can be adjusted to the wishes of the person wanting to vote. So I wonder how could the vote be held except in public and authenticated?
The only thing I objected to was voting down bug reports. Suggestions like the above one should be voted down in my opinion.
global chat :
voted up using both my nicks as you should too, assuming you have a second nick ... how stuffing ballot box is "democratic"?
You know folks, I admit to what I did, would do, or could do. Some people consider that very foolish, to admit to anything. However I believe it to be truth in knowledge, without which we bare ourselves to continued abuse by those who CARE NOT for community or Foldit. If you read the rest of that ' stuffing ' remark, I think you will notice that i have done it only on a certain subject.
Can anyone tell me in truth, that no one else has done exactly the same thing? If you can say that with a straight face, then I might consider you a very good politician. I am not excused for doing so by asking the question, but I know for a fact that allowing yourself to believe me, the only culprit, is well beneath your intelligences.
Attacking me serves no real purpose, except to create further ignorance of the facts and how the facts are constantly being betrayed by those who would keep us ignorant. In fact what I see is consistent stabbing in the back by those who want to keep a quid pro quo without due diligence.
I am without faith in the ability or desire of Foldit to fix its many issues and the constant playing at blaming those who try to bring this kind of behavior into the public view is a classic example.
I am most assuredly ashamed, not by myself I might add, but by those who think they know ' enough ' about matters like this.
There are answers, but not many that would be satisfactory for the majority of players, esp those who enjoy the use of external IRC. If a misuse/abuse can occur, one should expect that it will occur. To let it lie in hopes/prayers/crossed fingers that it won't occur is not wise nor intelligent.
So in fact Marie, I appreciate you bringing up my statement from global, just wish you had brought it all up so that people could see that it has been used only in very limited circumstances and that I knew from common courtesy that is not the proper way to address the subject in question, but simply admitting that it was not common courtesy DOES NOT MAKE IT wrong. What is wrong is having so many nicks available to those who MIGHT use them discourteously.
I know in fact that at least 3 nicks were created using my first nick of Hanto, but were not created by me. I'm pretty sure of the reason why and by whom, but cannot prove it. Should I become irrational pushing the subject? I only know that it is possible for people with bad intent to do such things. Could they also have voted on some feedback issues without my knowledge, sure they could have, did they? I don't know.
Just have to realize that anything that can be done, will be done, most likely not by well intentioned people who only want to prove a point, but by those who do not care for community, fair play, decency, all that old style malarkey.
Those of you in power be it global ops, channel ops, or devs have responsibilites to maintain decency and fair play. Devs have the added responsibility of maintaining a client with updates that provide for useful features and fair play between main and devprev. I want to see you guys do your jobs, all of your jobs. If that is asking to much, then simply let the rest of us know, so we can vote on who occupies the positions of power within the community. Or is that type of democracy to much to ask for????
Even some bug reports deserve to be voted down, when it is such an inconsequential and low-impact bug that it is not worth developer time to address. These would be bug reports like "I can't run FOLDIT on my 30 year old CPM-based PC. I need you to fix it."
Using your example of voting down is more an example of tyranny then education Angus, might be how you would like to be treated but I doubt many others would appreciate treatment in the same way. As a community we exist to educate not to indulge ourselves in inane attacks on opinions, ideas, or individuals. I would think the proper response to such a query be something like ' Hey dude, how ya doing? Regret to inform you that Foldit does not play on CPM based systems. ' and then possibly if a person is so inclined refer the query to information backing up your statement. In this way there would be no indication of negative attitude felt by the person creating the query. We're here to grow, not to wilt the vine upon which foldit is grown.