How hard is this? As this post has shown and others like the dick smith sales it is needed to stop something from reaching the front of the page with no information or actual bargains.
User: Mod: Not a response to thread
Locking voting before sales starting and prices being posted.
Gehirn on 24/03/2016 - 13:45
Last edited 24/03/2016 - 20:12 by 1 other user
Last edited 24/03/2016 - 20:12 by 1 other user
closed Comments
- 1
- 2
Ok
and no , its not a word
My neg for the sony deal was just revoked because my comment recieved too many negative votes.
The comment outlining why i voted negative for the deal had 12+ and 2-
I dont get it - obviously it sits at 10 over par
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/3563029/redir
I think i may just stop voting on deals altogether - its getting too political
-6 votes
pointless comment on 24/03/2016 - 14:21@lgacb08: i think if you are going to neg someone you should let them know about it…its just like punching someone in the dark otherwise…what kind of person does that?
Oh ok, so if i inderstand correctly:
My deal vote was revoked for recevieng a vote score of -6 on a separate comment that was totally unrelated to the comment giving the reason of my choice to vote negative on the actual deal?
That makes no sense - surely you see something wrong with that yeh?
That would mean that if you choose to neg any given deal, after you carefully state your reason to neg after ensuring that it falls within the rules, you had better refrain from making any further comments for fear that 5-6 people disagree with your comment that is unrelated to the actual comment reasoning your neg for the deal…that cant be right, i must be missing something here?
You could create a thread, where you discuss it between you and GC for 3 pages, repeating yourself constantly :)
Or just deal with that 1 rule and move on :)@Spackbace: its another rule that i am trying to ascertain The workings of….i dont understand as ive outlined above and would lke neil to clarify…not GC or you - it was a serious query that does not deserve to be met with attempted humour amd sarcasm
Seeing as you are suggesting noone wants to read GC and I comment to each other, along similar lines, Maybe you can create a thread just for you and Neil where he says anything at all about any topic whatsoever and you can just agree with whatever he says - or even what he is going to say
You could automate to pre-emptively agree and save yourself some time
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OkKhkJiJyo
:)
:)
@Spackbace: First off I have negged your comment, something I don't like to do. I have let your comments slip by but I will respond now, as this is several times you have written the same thing (irony).
I don't appreciate the sarcasm and the smiley faces is not fooling anyone.
In relation to repetition it was only you who had an issue, whereas the 3 pages was a deep discussion that has led to a change that will benefit the community.
If you want to talk about rules TA's post was invalid, shouldn't it have been removed? Funny how you have let this rule slip by, but willing to pull out the rule book for everything else.
I don't understand why pointless comments was removed a day later as well? From the voting guidelines it doesn't say anywhere your 1st comment should outline the reason of the negative.
@pointless comment: Wow I had my negative vote revoked by the community. Had a closer look at the rules "The community casts a number of negative comment votes to ANY comment by the user casting the deal votes"
Surely this rule needs to be changed? Otherwise we may as well get rid of negative vote option as its useless. I have had a comment with +11, +4 but because of one comment the negative is invalid? Surely this loophole needs to be changed. There is hardly any negative votes given on deals, when a deal warrants it you can't even put it with a ruling like this.
@GameChanger: well yeh, thats another doozy within the established rulebook.
Now its presented itself, if i choose to neg a deal, ill be sure not to make any further comment following so as not to jeopardize my right to vote after the fact
If i think a deal may be be neg worthy in future , i will hold off on making any comment in fear that i may have actually jeopardised my right, yes - in a past tense, to vote prior to the fact.
With recent acknowledgement of mention that people may be voting for users rather than deals - or votes based upon being "Ozbargain Friends" - whats to stop people going around negging the comments of a neg voter in a deal in order to have the neg vote revoked?
If i understand correctly all you need is five friends to neg any given comment of any given deal negger and the neg on the deal vanishes into cyberspace
Now its presented itself, if i choose to neg a deal, ill be sure not to make any further comment following so as not to jeopardize my right to vote after the fact
You trying to take advantage of a loophole or is it another form of your insecurity
@easternculture: dont understand pls grammar…its both a question and a statement or what?
EDIT: also still waiting on a response from you above after i challeged you to follow through with your accusations after your personal abuse/inflammatory comments directed towards me
@easternculture: EDIT: also still waiting on a response from you above after i challeged you to follow through with your accusations after your personal abuse/inflammatory comments directed towards me
referring to someone as insecure is not considered personal abuse/inflammatory comments
and you just did it again by repeating yourself in 2 comments
i.e.
EDIT: also still waiting on a response from you above after i challeged you to follow through with your accusations after your personal abuse/inflammatory comments directed towards me
@easternculture: EC which loophole you talking about?
It seems some users have taken advantage of it and gone back and negged comments to invalidate the negative vote. As PC put it must be the Ozbargain friends.
@easternculture: wait what? Sorry, i cut andpasted something twice accidentally , but you consider that as being insecure? Please explain yourself…i dont get it
20 neg votes left on that post, all of their comments are either neutral vote, or pos voted. Seems it's only you and PC that made comments that saw the community down vote you.
Oh, but I guess that was a select group that chose to specifically down vote you 2?
Or maybe, just maybe, people didn't appreciate the comments you made?
The whole community revoked neg has been around for a while, and at no time have I seen anyone kick up such a stink.
Do you 2 just enjoy playing the victim card?referring to someone as insecure is not considered personal abuse/inflammatory comments
Well thats subjective i guess, but lets tally your barrage of insults and attempts at inflammatory comments towards me tonight so far:
1) you interjected into dialogue between me and another user without provocation to label me as insecure, and that i may need to seek help.
If sincere, its a form of personal abuse.
If not, its distasefully making light of mental health issues and definitiely inflammatory
2) you used the adjective 'dumb' towards me. Call it personal abuse or inflammatory
3) you suggested i need to "seek comfort" Again distastefully making light of mental health issues given the context and definitely inflammatory
Although its against my usual code of not bothering the mods with personal issues …im considering reporting you with a view to a possible penalty box incursion….im not easily offended but you really are trying to antagonise me tonight, i dont jnow why you are taking things so personally but you really are forcing my hand here
@Spackbace: After I made some comments today relating to TA guess what you and another person replied to old comments in that thread. Are you going to own up to neging me? Because I don't believe in coincidences.
Victim card?
If it wasn't for me, PC, King TA, Clarky and the others we would have a site that has no integrity. You don't want people to save money? You don't want a system that is transparent and fair?
If you cared to notice its hard to get people to comment in the feedback side of the site but by the up votes of comments there is so many people who agree with the issues.
People don't kick up a 'stink'- have a read through the comments regarding the removals of negative votes. If you can't see that removal of negs based on community votes is a loophole than you don't want a proper voting system.
insecurity
ɪnsɪˈkjɔːrɪti,ˌɪnsɪˈkjʊərɪti/Submitnoun
uncertainty or anxiety about oneself; lack of confidence.
"she had a deep sense of insecurity"
synonyms:lack of confidence, lack of self-confidence, self-doubt, diffidence, unassertiveness, humility, humbleness, meekness, timidity, timidness, timorousness, uncertainty, nervousness, hesitancy, inhibition, self-consciousness; anxiety, apprehension, worry, unease, uneasiness
"he tried to conceal his insecurity"
vulnerability, defencelessness, unguardedness, lack of protection, perilousness, peril, danger, riskiness; instability, fragility, frailty, shakiness, rockiness, unsteadiness, unreliability, tenuousness; informalchanciness, iffiness; informaldodginess
"we were conscious of the insecurity of our situation"
For myself, I love to know of a good sale that is coming up soon.
In fact for me, knowing of a future bargain/sale can save me money from something that I might have brought between that period. Which did infact happen to me, on an eBay deal.As for the current Sony post, the previous similar sales were great bargains (the early up-votes are evident of that expectation). So we can expect something good/decent value coming up soon. Also we knew when it was coming, which was only 30 min away.
Seeing that some people don't like the "early sale notice". Maybe the Mods/devs can make an option for users to op-in/out, for these types of posts, and miss out on the those great bargains that's already sold out when they finally notice. Instead of locking votes on such a posts, as honestly I and others wouldn't notice them; especially if it wasn't on the front page.
I like to know of a good sale too, and what im proposing would still inform people of them. However there's been plenty of these types of posts such as dick smiths, some ebay sales, clothes websites etc that are pure speculation which are against posting guidelines, and don't end up being worth the time when it makes it to the front page from speculation that there may be a great bargain.
It's not that it is a "early sale notice", it's against the rules because 1)it doesn't list the object in the title and 2)many items were cheaper elsewhere.
You must miss out on a lot of things if all you check is the front page.
OK, this thread has turned into pointless trolling. Comments closed.
To answer the OP. No, votes won't be locked.
- 1
- 2
Not sure what's the big deal…if ur a true ozbargainer you don't need the VOTES to tell you if its a deal or not. I've never really bought an item based on the upvote I use is as an extra tool to lead me to its bargainitiny (if it's a word haha).