My concern regarding the unrecommend feature: LBN

[Coventina]

I spend most of my time anymore posting news stories in LBN.

Now, I don't expect everyone to find the stories I find worthy of posting always to their taste, but I do have a concern about the ability to actively try to keep them from the "Greatest Page."

The case I ran into today was a story I posted about the Pope meeting with Obama. It immediately went <0.

Is this because the story wasn't important or because posters don't like the Pope?

I think LBN is already so tightly monitored that stories that truly don't belong there are locked or deleted anyway. Is it really needed to vote LBN threads down?

Okay, feel free to unrecommend my concern away!

:-)

[Laelth]

1. I would think LBN stories would have the best chance of making it now.

It seems to me the principal effect of the unrec function will be to turn the Greatest Page into a happy, peaceful, liberal news feed. If you have an LBN story that appeals to your run-of-the-mill liberal, it ought to appear.

It will be the controversial threads in which someone is making a new and challenging argument that will be "disappeared," I would think, not LBN stories.

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[valerief]

2. I don't like Pope stories. I don't like the Pope. nt

[SoCalDem]

15. Nor do I, BUT why "unreccommend"? Why not just "don't click it"

and if enough people who DO like it, recommend it, so what?

I don't recall us being asked to "vote" yay or nay on EVERY post.

[valerief]

18. I want to subtract a rec vote. nt

[pecwae]

23. And there's no reason you

shouldn't be able to do so.

[DJ13]

3. What happens to a post that gets 5 rec's & makes the Greatest

......then sees a swarm of un-rec's that takes it below the 5 for the Greatest page?

[Control-Z]

5. It is supposed to drop off the greatest page,

until/if it is voted back again, and I believe, it goes back to its original slot. (If I remember correctly)

[Mrs. Overall]

4. I think you've brought up an interesting point about the rec/unrec feature--

On one hand there is the importance of the story, even if the subject matter is distasteful or harsh and then there is one's opinion of the story--one's like or dislike of the subject matter.

I had to think for a moment before recommending a thread that dealt with the horrible racist comments against Malia Obama. I thought the story was important for people to see, so that caused me to want to "rec" it, but, of course, the subject matter pissed me off, so a part of me wanted to "unrec" it, to show disapproval.

There's an inherent trap one might feel toward certain stories and the rec/unrec option.

News is news, so it does seem strange to vote an LBN story down.

[Ms. Toad]

16. Actually - what got me to unrec that one

was that - at the time (although it has changed now because of at least one deleted sub-thread) - more than half of the comments were an argument about rec/unrec - which I don't consider a greatest topic.

I'm not particularly thrilled about the thread topic (what nasty things Freepers are saying) - but don't feel strongly enough aside from the side conversation that took over the thread about it to vote one way or another.

[The Straight Story]

6. It is not always about the stories, if people don't like you then they will do an unrec

:)

[pecwae]

24. That works both ways.

[anigbrowl]

7. To be frank, when I want LBN I just go to that forum

And because of th strict rules that govern posting in LBN, I tend to look at the headlines rather than the # of recs. The latter only influences me when I look at a thread title and I'm wondering if it's a BS thread or not, and even then not much.

[Ohio Joe]

8. Belong & Rec'd are different things

Because a given story belongs in LBN, does not mean it is worthy of being rec'd. The mods take care of the belong part, consensus vote determines Rec numbers.

[WI_DEM]

9. +1

[Warren Stupidity]

10. So what?

Suppose your pope story only got 4 recs before THE CHANGE? All you need is five more positive than negative. If the majority consensus +4 of the board is "GREAT" then great it is. Otherwise, not so much. The consensus will be what it is. I personally like the idea that what is 'GREAT' is no longer whatever five people think is great. If that means some news stories of merit might only be on the front page of DU and on the latest page, and on the LBN forum, oh well...

[Lone_Star_Dem]

11. Coventina, I saw that today. It was a classic case of people reading a headline not the article

Your article had a crappy headline. Not your fault, and it's not like you can jazz it up per LBN rules. As a result some people who just saw the headline reacted and unrec'd an article which even they may have agreed with if they had bothered to read it.

For those who missed it, the article covered Obama standing up to the Pope over a woman's right to choose and embryonic stem cell research. The Pope in turn gave him a book on bioethics. The asinine headline read: Pope gives Obama booklet on bioethics

It was a decent example of a flaw in our self-moderation here on DU. We sometimes can be too reactionary.

[Beetwasher]

12. Actually You CAN Jazz It Up If You Have Room After The Title

Sometimes I'll post an LBN story w/ a shitty title and then put a parenthetical comment afterward to "jazz it up". I believe that is allowed by the rules.

Just a bit of advice. ;)

[Lone_Star_Dem]

14. True enough

I admit to using parentheses to delicately expose the intent of the article before my own self. In this case it needed a whole new headline, which Reuters later provided.

Power to the parentheses! :D

[Left coast liberal]

13. You have a good point. NT

[EarlG]

17. I think I can answer this one

LBN threads are already featured prominently on the DU home page. There is the top news slot, front and center, which has the largest headline on the site. Below that are the five Greatest threads, and then below that are all the stories in LBN listed chronologically, newest at the top. LBN threads actually get pretty much the best placement on the site, regardless of the number of recs they get.

I hope that eases your concern somewhat.

[Egnever]

19. +1

[HCE SuiGeneris]

21. Wow. What a crock of

shit really useful information!

I had to :hi: :hide:

The histrionics that are occurring are quite funny!

[Coventina]

26. Thanks, EarlG. n/t

[althecat]

20. I agree... this allows anonymous censorship... Its a disruptors wet dream...

If you have 10 disruptors working together they can bury whatever they like...

[althecat]

22. I think that votes and unvotes should both be recorded and displayed....

That way at least you can see if a story is being censored...

[jakeXT]

25. We could make a lowest page with negative numbers

Now you don't even know how many recs and unrecs there are, only the difference.

[OregonBlue]

27. I think we should be able to see who rec and unrecs. It would be pretty clear very quickly who was

working together to get an important post buried.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. Agreed