| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
Suggestion:
Replies:
What would be the point. The people who are bitching would just "ignore" the people who give them negative criticism and "friend" the people that gush over their crappy poems.
The Poemranker actually works quite nicely in kind of a Darwinian way. The weak (see Rbooey) eventually grow tired and leave, while the people who actually have some sort of promise end up staying. They may leave for a while on and off, but they'll come back. And if they don't, someone will take their place. Just like when Rbooey leaves, some other whiny teenager will show up and bitch and moan because nobody likes their crappy "poetry". Not that your idea is a bad one and it's been suggested before...just that it probably wouldn't do the site any actual good in the grand scheme of things.
I guess it depends on your philosophy, weather your a Darwinist or a nurturist. Its true that cheesy stuff needs to be marked for what it is, but I don't really want to do be the one doing it, and some people don't want their nose rubbed in it.
I came on here the other day, wanting a quick fix of nothing new and got the same guys corny mush time and time again. Every time I hit the random button. EVER TIME. I know I never want to see anything he's written again. I want a button that will make it happen. On the other side of the coin I get reactionary, mindless (or worse) obvious statements that arenât constructive from someone who will make it their personal quest to tell you what they think about everything you've ever done, when after the first comment you're not interested anymore. I'll admit that some of the bitches under some of these poems are quite funny, but in the end they are just bitches. There is always someone who is stupid/jealous/'suffering form emotional problems'/whatever who will have a go because you can't please everybody, and so any effort one puts in here turns into boring bitch fight: slightly amusing but most painful. I wouldn't imagine this is why anyone would post work here and I'm sure isn't in the sprit of the site to begin with. But hey, thatâs just the way I feel about it.
Personally, I would like to see more people give real, positive and honest criticism, and I'm probably not that person, but I think whoever tries is going to run into the fact that everyone on poemranker either (a) ignores anything that isn't gush, anyway, whether it's phrased positively or negatively, (b) is looking for advice and doesn't care if it's positively phrased or negatively, or (c) doesn't give a fuck and just wants to post silly poems about obscure British politicians. In any event, whoever tries is going to end up jaded and broken or just leave. At least I'm still here, commenting on the same its/it's confusion I have been since the beginning. Still, you're the nurturing one; why don't you give it a try?
The random rotation is decided, illogically, by the poems that have been voted on the least. That is, the blandest and worst. Am I one of the bitches? Good Lord, you've got me so wrong!
Umm, we're not talking about you.
But as for your points, regarding the different types of people you seem to have reduced the population to here, (a) would be in favour of the ignore feature, and (b) and (c) wouldn't care, so the overall it would please more people and deter none. Unless of course there is a forth group: (d) The bitches, who would probably not be so keen on the idea as they would lose their⦠free outlet/theropy.
I don't believe people should be here to be pleased.
As the system works, pretty much all users tend to ignore comments they don't like (or from people they don't like) anyway. So what difference would it make to just make the process automatic? Regarding (d): With poemranker's turnover, there's no way people who were just interested in bitching would suffer under your proposed system. They'd just bitch at new users who hadn't had a chance to censor or learn to ignore them yet. If you check the comments page, you'll see that this is pretty much what the bitches already do. Incidentally, my experience is poemranker users tend to hate people who've commented negatively but not notice when they've commented constructively. How could you ensure someone who'd gotten a bunch of karma points knocked for criticising a poem's, say, overuse of caps would re-earn his points for posting a thoughtful and helpful critique. I can almost guarantee it wouldn't happen. I get called a bitch about as often as anyone on the site, but I think you'll agree, my comments ( http://www.poemranker.com/comment-recent
So you think that even group (d) would not be affected by the introduction of such a system. Then we are left with the case that more people are pleased and none displeased by the introduction of an ignore system.
If people want to participate in a survival of the fittest system then they don't have to use the ignore option, but at least they would have the choice. I personally know some brilliant writers who are just too shy to contribute here because of this aggressive feedback environment. Ideally this would act as the first step to actually preforming live in front of an audience, but if someone is too shy to post a verse on the internet how will they ever start reading aloud in front of others. There are some great talents hiding out there, which is why I persist with this site, but we'll never know if they get kicked in the guts as soon as they poke their heads out. I think if you want to tear people down you should have the guts to do it at a live reading, which of course group (d) would never do. (and no I'm not talking about you, I'm generalising so I don't refer to specifics/individuals only groups. You don't have to defend yourself. We're not talking about you or anyone specifically)
I repeat: I don't think people should be here to be pleased. Almost every user here is going to fall into two categories: (a) People who need help writing poetry, and (b) people who write great poetry and don't need help. Group (a) is going to be displeased some because getting help means someone's going to be telling them they're doing something wrong. Even if you do all the right critical things (believe me, I know how to do them; I taught writing classes as a grad student,) in order for the criticism to be useful they're going to have to hear that the poem would be more effective if they used "they're" instead of "their", or if they didn't capitalize everything. My experience with poemranker is most users'll get pissed at that anyway, so why spend all your time buttressing your critique with "I can tell you're really feeling an emotion here!1!!" or "'shitting blood' is a very effective image!!1!!"? Group (b) is going to be pleased, but it's not like they really need to be here anyway. If group (a) has the option to ignore critiques that displease them, they're almost all going to ignore the help they need. Trust me. Group (b) isn't going to ignore critiques, of course, but then they don't really need them anyway.
Yes, there is a group (d), and no they wouldn't bother with poetry readings. That's because they don't really believe in poetry.
Saying you don't think people should be pleased on a website is like saying you don't want people on your website. Its an oxymoron.
Besides that, down to two sets of people now. I guess the people who already write good poetry and are on this site don't know they write good poetry and so are on this site. How are they going to find out if every second comment is 'I think its shit' and they get a zero because the ranker in question is jealous or spiteful or are 16. How is group (b) ever going to get off this site? More importantly the people who need help, how are they going to improve with this level of idiocy, and believe me at least 50% of the 'critical feedback' are of this calibre. Its not helping group (a) either. What I'm arguing against is not constructive feedback but unconstructive feedback which is damaging to the community and to the person on the receiving end. Its the trolls that need weeding out because they attach themselves to any community and generally bring the quality down. They are inevitable to online communities, weather your talking about writing or politics or movies or whatever. Like the disruptive kids in the back of the class. They don't contribute but make noise because they seek attention. I personally am not interested in this and if some way to moderate trolls is not implemented then I'll stop contributing here and find another community, which is silently whatâs happening I think. This will go on until you left with a high troll concentration and very little talent, and then even the trolls will abandon the site.
You can't 'weed' anybody out!!! That's nonsense. Be a Hitler if you want to try. All we do here is crap on each other or give encouragment, however we feel at the time. Do it or get out.
I'm not talking about gardening. On the internet everyone can be happy. You can have your little Tourettes heaven and those not interested can have theirs. The two can peacefully coexist.
Then be happy, whatever that has to do with it.
Hey, wow. By mentioning the term 'constructive feedback' you have just ensured that I'll never like this plan. Funny how that works, isn't it? Not that I have anything against that, I just hate the term and the insistence on how the only thing you can ever do is help others, which I don't believe in.
hummm, ya, fertiliser
hey - I'm not in this conversation at all - however.....
how do these friends of your plan to succeed without facing an aggressive feedback environment? You can write brilliant poems in your room all day - but if you ever want to publish them you're going to havae to be able to deal with criticism and rejection, aren't you?
yes yes, Wolves, fittest. I do we send the children our to face the wolves or do we send the adults? Perhaps when you will kick your new born into the deep end of a 50 meter pool. I would make sure they can swim first. Etc etc
slight correction on the random rotation -- it's the poems that have least recently been voted on.
A note on community buildign from one of the founders of Flickr.com: http://bizwerk.blogspot.com/2005/04/comm
What is a "troll" in this context?
What a fucking cunt of a good idea! Perhaps the silly muffs who get upset about "criticism" should go to www.pleasantpeopleleavinggayremarksonpeo
|
Alternatively there are various 'karma' systems which allow communities to moderate themselves but allowing people to assign a certain amount of positive or negative karma to people.