Lets talk about negative votes

Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 13:53

I'd like to start a discussion to see what people's thoughts are on negative votes and how they are handled.

I've done my fair share of + and - votes in my time on ozbargain and would like to discuss a scenario that happens often enough to be worth talking about:

You can post (essentially) the same comment/share the same view as another user but if you down vote a deal you will attract substantially more negative votes.

example 1: https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/306438 - comments: http://i.imgur.com/VeSkBqD.png http://i.imgur.com/9dN08uC.png
example 2: https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/290061 - comments: http://i.imgur.com/AdJ0Zk3.png http://i.imgur.com/R7EY14n.png

I'm sure I am not the only one to have experienced this and I can see the reasoning as to why it may happen. But in my second example it seems quite strange that on a deal with only 14 up votes that within an hour of myself leaving a comment and down voting 8 people felt strongly enough about the deal to down vote my comment hence removing my down vote on the deal. I'm not necessarily claiming any foul play but I do think this is quite interesting.

Whilst a down vote to a deal can be removed by enough down votes on a comment, the down vote to the deal doesn't get reinstated if the comment later gets more up votes. Furthermore, does it even make sense that negative votes on deals can be removed through popular opinion? Whether or not someone thinks a deal is good or not is their own opinion and whilst people may worry that "great deals" can be tarnished through the use of down votes that can't be removed, I would argue that if a deal is truly "great" that the up votes will easily outweigh the down votes and it isn't really an issue.

Site Discussion

Comments

  • pantsparty on 10/05/2017 - 14:00
    +47

    Honestly you are thinking too hard about Ozbargain to post this. Come visit, grab some deals, leave some comments if you like, and go enjoy your day! Now feel free to down vote me :)

    • Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 14:03
      +27

      Thanks for your opinion mate but I actually wanted to talk about the topic hence why I created the post. If you didn't want to discuss it maybe don't bother commenting, commenting isn't compulsory :)

      • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 13:47
        +8

        In some cultures, red is lucky.

      • payton on 14/05/2017 - 22:29
        +4

        IMO yours got removed because its not within guidelines, its not a valid neg vote.
        The way it is now, a valid neg vote is a good indication for people to think twice before purchasing something - the neg vote serves its intended purpose.

        If 'its crap' is deemed valid, all deals on Ozbargain will be littered with neg votes with nonsensical explanation - making it difficult to make decisions and wasting everyone's time.

    • PJC on 10/05/2017 - 17:29
      -4

      Have a plus-vote.

  • Baysew on 10/05/2017 - 14:08
    +2

    You can post (essentially) the same comment/share the same view as another user but if you down vote a deal you will attract substantially more negative votes.

    If you down vote a deal, outside of Voting Guidelines, you may find your comment will be down voted.

    • Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 14:12
      -2

      Yep fair point, but I think you would find that these voting guidelines are very loosely followed or even enforced. I could find you dozens of examples of down votes outside of these guidelines that haven't been revoked by mods.

      • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 14:15

        You may want to see the section called "Any negative vote that falls into any of these reasons will be revoked by a moderator", followed by a long list below. Also with 4.6 million comments, we rely on the community to report invalid votes. So please do report the comment/vote.

        • Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 14:22
          -7

          a bit misleading to say "4.6 million comments", the actual number of down vote to deal comments would be considerably lower than that. edit: considering you already moderate every deal that gets posted it wouldn't be much harder to moderate down votes which would be even less than that

        • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 14:26

          @Your Friend:

          We've had 4,666,655 comments. If there is a comment that is spam, a personal attack, invalid vote, etc. we rely on the community reporting it.

          you already moderate every deal that gets posted

          Based on people mostly reporting the deal… 2,417 reports in March or roughly one every 18 minutes.

        • Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 14:29
          -1

          @neil: See my edit to the previous comment, but this wasn't really the focus of why I made this post. Do you think its reasonable that if someone does down vote something within the "voting guidelines" that their down vote can be removed through popular opinion?

        • nocure on 10/05/2017 - 14:31
          +10

          @Your Friend:
          Last time I looked "crap deal" wasn't a good enough reason to neg, stick by the rules and you will be fine.

        • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 14:48

          @Your Friend:

          Yep, I agree with that comment because this topic has been discussed to death.

          2007, 2010, 2010, 2011, 2012 2014, 2017 and loads more.

          We always welcome feedback and in fact, we just today raised the threshold to revoke negative votes, however we won't be changing the voting system.

        • Ryanek on 10/05/2017 - 15:27
          +5

          @Your Friend: Getting a little pedantic don't you think?

        • spackbace on 10/05/2017 - 15:31
          +5

          @Your Friend:

          Misleading?

          Is this how you 'discuss' things, by just attacking people?

        • Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 16:09
          -6

          @Spackbace: how is saying someone's comment is misleading the same as attacking them?

        • Savas on 10/05/2017 - 17:51
          +11

          @neil: Can we please have some more negs so we can show Your Friend how they work?

        • gimli on 10/05/2017 - 20:12

          There is an easy option to reduce the number of comments

        • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 13:56
          +2

          You may want to see the section called "Any negative vote that falls into any of these reasons will be revoked by a moderator", followed by a long list below.

          Translation: Negative votes other than those explicitly covered by that section will not be removed by moderators.

          The guidelines are not rules and are not enforced. One can negative vote a deal with any irrelevant/illogical/absurd comment and it won't be removed by a moderator unless it falls foul of a specific rule.

        • payton on 14/05/2017 - 22:15

          @Gimli:

          Hide comments from user X, yeah there's a limit how many can be blocked, and there are waaay more man-childs in this place than that.
          This is even before counting the people who blatantly post incorrect information or whose comments are just plain pointless.

  • BigTed on 10/05/2017 - 14:12

    I agree with you that negs shouldn't be removed through public opinion.
    I do not agree with you that negs are simply a matter of personal opinion.
    Here on Ozbargain downvotes have to meet specific criteria.
    You do not get to neg a deal simply because you do not like it.
    You can only downvote if:
    1. It is not the cheapest price (in which case, please post a link to the cheapest price)
    2. the product is defective (an explanation might help), or
    3. major issues with retailer (this is perhaps the trickiest one - some people have issues with Gearbest for example, others don't. Rmember, it must be a MAJOR issue - losing the odd order here or there probably doesn't count).
    If your downvote doesn't fall into one of those criteria then you cannot downvote.

    • Clear on 10/05/2017 - 23:01
      +1
      1. major issues with retailer (this is perhaps the trickiest one - some people have issues with Gearbest for example, others don't. Rmember, it must be a MAJOR issue - losing the odd order here or there probably doesn't count).

      Unfortunately this happens far too often when people have a grudge against a company. Say something bad and in many cases people will be behind you no matter what anyone says.

      • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 23:21

        Losing an order is definitely a valid reason for a negative vote.

        The big picture is that negative votes are there to point out issues with the retailer (or price or product). If I were going to buy something from a store and saw negative votes about lost orders, I think that is valuable information to be highlighted to the user which would impact the decision of purchasing or not.

        Negative votes came from a place of warning others of issues in the deal but I'll give a similar example.

        Referrals are another example of where we thought, hey post a good deal, and then we're cool with you putting your referral link in…To people spamming their referral links as deals and having to develop guidelines and automated limits on how many/where etc. Then people spamming the comments with referral links and us having to develop more guidelines and automated system to remove them. Then people making huge wikis with links and of course spamming/messing with other people's links and then us developing an automated referral system. It'd be great if everyone just did the right thing but just as in society, and getting bargains we push things to the limits. I guess that's human nature (not the band).

        • andy19363 on 11/05/2017 - 07:35

          If I were going to buy something from a store and saw negative votes about lost orders, I think that is valuable information to be highlighted to the user which would impact the decision of purchasing or not.

          Except the post would likely be invisible to most users due to neg voting, meaning nobody gets the information….. Doesn't take many "me too" or "man that sucks" negs to remove a post.

        • Clear on 11/05/2017 - 09:04
          +1

          My point was more a long the lines of "anyone can making something up about a company and people will back them" rather than lost orders specifically.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 15:04
      +2

      Here on Ozbargain downvotes have to meet specific criteria.
      You do not get to neg a deal simply because you do not like it.
      You can only downvote if:
      1. It is not the cheapest price (in which case, please post a link to the cheapest price)
      2. the product is defective (an explanation might help), or
      3. major issues with retailer (this is perhaps the trickiest one - some people have issues with Gearbest for example, others don't. Rmember, it must be a MAJOR issue - losing the odd order here or there probably doesn't count).
      If your downvote doesn't fall into one of those criteria then you cannot downvote.

      All of these assertions are false:

      See my comment above.

  • [Deactivated] on 10/05/2017 - 14:54
    +8

    negs or +, its still a vote.
    dont cry when it doesn't go your way

  • Colombian on 10/05/2017 - 15:08
    +2

    Be happy and don't worry too much.

    Cheers!!

  • try2bhelpful on 10/05/2017 - 15:38
    +22

    Personally I don't think negative votes on deals and/or comments is particularly helpful; the number of times I've seen where people have put up deals and then begged for mercy makes me both sad and mad. People who put posts up online, unless they are affiliated, are doing this as a favour to other people - the deal may not be of interest to you but that doesn't mean it doesn't appeal to others. I also think that people abuse the negative vote system by not sticking to the guidelines. I find it particularly annoying when people say something isn't a bargain just because it is not less than standard price. I don't care what the RRP price is on a product, it should be based on what is value for money not on the fact is costs less than it did yesterday. Good is still good at a "value" price and crap is still crap no matter how cheap it is.

    I use this site to find bargains, I post messages sometimes, but I wouldn't call this an entirely supportive site; in fact the negativity can be quite offputting. If I post something up here I tend to put it up and brace myself for the negative comments and feedback. There are plenty of bargains I've seen that I've not posted because I can't be bothered dealing with the flak; I suspect there are many other people out there that feel the same. Even if I am pointing out a shortcoming in a posting I try to remember to thank the OP for their time and efforts.

    I don't mind good hearted banter/ribbing/humour, or people posting alternatives that are better value, but some of the comments here go way beyond that. I have now learnt to walk away from these comments to stop myself responding in kind.

    I suspect it is only a small subset that are doing this, and I thank the many people who don't go this way, but, if there is a skewing in the demographics of the users of the site, it might be something for the moderators to consider if they want to appeal to a wider audience.

    I suspect my comments here will be negged out of existence - which sort of reinforces my point.

    • andy19363 on 10/05/2017 - 16:15
      +7

      I agree
      Have said it many times, so won't bore with the details….
      The neg system has been broken for years……
      Many many people do not post deals anymore (I haven't posted one since 2011), because of that system. The neg vote just promotes and invites…. erm…. negativity…

      • tranter on 10/05/2017 - 21:48
        +1

        I also agree. I've seen a lot of these types of discussions and it gets nowhere. There's no point giving feedback to OzBargain administrators.

        • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 22:15

          No, we welcome feedback (that's the name of this forum) and I'm happy to wear being an ahole on this issue. But we have discussed this so so so many times (2007, 2010, 2010, 2011, 2012 2014, 2017 + more), we've trialed removing negative votes entirely (fail), we've trialed not revoking negative votes at all (fail), we've tinkered with a few other things. In fact, we've responded to andy's comment every single year for the past several years with the same stats proving otherwise. The voting system is certainly not a silver bullet but this is the best it will be based on extensive discussion and testing. So again we welcome feedback, it's how guidelines and features are created and evolved however we won't be changing the voting system.

        • andy19363 on 10/05/2017 - 22:53

          @neil:

          we've trialed removing negative votes entirely (fail)

          I think we could say that it wasn't popular, rather than a fail…… Which also begs the questions…. what does a successful negative vote system look like? What was/is the desired outcome of having the negging system?

          (I should clarify, this is for negative votes on deals only…… post negging is different and, unless used for revoking inappropriate negative post votes…. is completely irrelevant)

        • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 23:05

          @andy19363:

          Voting Guidelines

          Negative Vote

          • Purpose:

          To let others know about issues with the deal, merchant or product.

          • Result of negative vote(s):

          If there are more negative votes than positive, the deal is hidden on new deals page & categories page for visitors and users with default settings.
          All comments by the user who cast the negative vote are highlighted with a negative vote symbol.
          If the negative votes are cast against a deal posted by a rep, this will increase the time period between their next subsequent post.

        • try2bhelpful on 11/05/2017 - 10:21
          +1

          @neil: and while you don't change the system you will still have the same problem of alienating people who might, otherwise, be putting deals up here. It is not just the voting system it is the obnoxious comments - and when a reply is made pointing them out your comment is often the one voted out of existence. I admit I have said intemperate things, but they are usually in reply to an original bigotted comment. I am not happy with some of my own replies, which is why I have stopped challenging these comments, but that just means the original comment stands without being challenged so it is considered "normal".

          It is interesting how something that is completely revolutionary, suddenly becomes everyday once someone takes the first step.

        • Moderatorneil on 11/05/2017 - 10:49

          @try2bhelpful:

          That claim about people not posting deals is simply untrue based on our statistics of deals posted.

          However, there are elements of this community that are rude and as you say they alienate people which is why we rely on people reporting comments. In the past 4 months, we've called out a number of these users both publicly and privately which has resulted in positive + respectful changes in most cases.

          WE WANT people to be critical of deals but we DON'T WANT people to be critical of people. Sometimes people take the negative vote as a reflection of the OP and not the deal which is why we simply ask people to back up your vote with an explanation.

        • tranter on 11/05/2017 - 11:35

          You haven't seen the countless feedback in comments where people say they don't bother posting deals any longer because of the exact thing being discussed here?

        • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 10:34
          +1

          @neil: How can you have statistics on what people haven't posted? As people can see the deals, without having to register, you don't know how many people may have been put of posting because of responses. It is all very well to say that people shouldn't take negative comments and voting personally but can be very hard to do that; particularly if you are a newbie. Personally, I approach this site with a certain amount of dread, I like the deals, and try to contribute to the forums, but it can be very confronting. (I have worked in IT all my working life, so I am used to being a minority, but this site is beyond anything I've experienced before.) Personally, I find it male skewed, particularly, in the forum areas. However, I would be very interested to see the statistics that show that the participation rates are roughly in line with the population. However, this is your site so you can run it how you like and I can use it, or not use it, as is my perogative. Just pointing out issues as I see them.

        • andy19363 on 12/05/2017 - 11:23
          -2

          @try2bhelpful:
          Flogging a dead horse I'm afraid….

          So again we welcome feedback, it's how guidelines and features are created and evolved however we won't be changing the voting system.

          Feedback welcomed, but it won't make any difference, so pointless making it.
          The neg vote remains a pointless tool of the troll and business competitor, who are the most vocal about removing them.
          It's stated purpose "To let others know about issues with the deal, merchant or product" fails, as legitimate information disappears beneath the waves of "usual price!!", "same price as last week", limited size!!" "not a deal" negatives. Deals with significant issues disappear anyway, due to heavy 'me too' negging, so the legitimate warnings disappear too.

          It's crap, but there is no interest in improving things

        • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 12:49
          +1

          @andy19363: I don't know why people are so negative about this comment. The phrasing might be a touch strong but the basic thrust is valid. Too many people "jump in" on a bargain posting that have no interest in the product in the first place. I'm also sick of the "same price last week", "usual price" comments. Give me the product, give me the cost, give me the URL and I'm happy to do my own background research on value. Anyone who would buy a "deal" on this site without doing their own background check on the product, competitors prices, reviews, etc would not be worthy of the title of "bargainer".

          For the people who post - If you have a better deal on this then give me the comment and the URL, or if there is an issue with the product/company then give me that, otherwise let me make up my own mind what a bargain is. Just because you, personally, don't like the product is not a reason enough to disparage it. I quite like some of the humourous comments; but people need to understand the audience out there is broad and bigotted comments are not acceptable.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/05/2017 - 13:37

          @try2bhelpful:

          How can you have statistics on what people haven't posted?

          Deal posts by year graph:

          graph

          Sure, that's a good point. The facts are more deals are being posted yearly. So you can say that despite any factors of resistance (e.g. negative votes, can't be bothered, whatever) people are continuing to post deals. Or you can also make the conclusion that despite more and more deals posted each year, perhaps we would have a larger amount of deals without negative voting. Either way, the trend is positive. If less and less deals were posted each year then that would be trend to negative. Of course, there are a lot of other factors, such as there are only a finite amount of deals or stores like Masters/Dick Smith closing down. Read the 2016 Zeitgeist.

          Personally, I approach this site with a certain amount of dread, I like the deals, and try to contribute to the forums, but it can be very confronting.

          Yes, there are a minority of users who can be rude and disrespectful which is why we are promoting a new inititive to call these users out, to PM them etc. To my surprise after chatting with these users, everything works out alright after. Take a look at this comment from yesterday. It's a work in progress but I think we can improve.

          Personally, I find it male skewed, particularly, in the forum areas.

          This is true. See our March stats. Would welcome any ideas to encourage women to use OzBargain.

          However, this is your site so you can run it how you like and I can use it, or not use it, as is my perogative.

          Thanks for the feedback. The majority of features and sections of OzBargain are shaped by site discussions and suggestions from members.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/05/2017 - 13:44

          @andy19363:

          The neg vote remains a pointless tool of the troll and business competitor, who are the most vocal about removing them.

          Competitors need to follow the rep code of conduct. Voting negative or commenting on a competitor is against our guidelines.

          I'll reiterate again, we always welcome feedback. Users can do so in the Comments / Feedback / Suggestions Thread 2017 and can peruse the older threads: Comments / Feedback / Suggestions Thread 2016, Comments / Feedback / Suggestions Thread 2008-2015.

        • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 14:53
          +1

          @neil: The trend may be more posts, but, as we know already, people have commented that they have been put off posting because of the comments and negatives - the issue is around the scale. Given the apparent comparitive lack of female participation on a "bargain" site, I would be surprised if it isn't a reasonable number; but, again, I am only speculating as it is not possible to determine the scale, or reasoning, of non participation. Again, this is your site and I'm only highlighting my experience and view of the information provided here. YMMV.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 15:34
          -1

          @try2bhelpful:

          Personally, I find it male skewed, particularly, in the forum areas.

          Agreed!!

          Perhaps a like button and the ability to post selfies would make the site more welcoming to chicks. 🤔

        • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 15:37

          @neil:

          The facts are more deals are being posted yearly. So you can say that despite any factors of resistance (e.g. negative votes, can't be bothered, whatever) people are continuing to post deals. Or you can also make the conclusion that despite more and more deals posted each year, perhaps we would have a larger amount of deals without negative voting. Either way, the trend is positive.

          But by how much has the userbase grown and how has the ratio of deal posts to users changed over time?

          What about the ratio of users who post deals to those who don't, how has that changed?

    • Clear on 10/05/2017 - 23:09
      +3

      I suspect it is only a small subset that are doing this, and I thank the many people who don't go this way,

      Pay attention to the votes on comments. You'll notice the same people upvoting the same people that have something bad to say about a company or product no matter how absurd it is. The review feature is how I keep track of them ;)

      • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 15:56
        +1

        Pay attention to the votes on comments. You'll notice the same people upvoting the same people

        IKR!! It's like I have my own personal fan-club! 😌

    • bluesky on 11/05/2017 - 12:27
      +2

      People who put posts up online, unless they are affiliated, are doing this as a favour to other people - the deal may not be of interest to you but that doesn't mean it doesn't appeal to others.

      I agree with this comment, which is why I suggested the below - allowing a poster to optionally tag a deal as intended for the common bargain hunter (as opposed to the "expert"). Which hopefully will address somewhat the issue of "expert" bargain hunters dealing harsh criticisms.

    • PJC on 12/05/2017 - 11:34

      if there is a skewing in the demographics of the users of the site

      I realise the demographic for this site is teenage boys https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/3611429/redir

      • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 12:57

        Allowing the moderator to state the position here. I still think my original posting is probably more accurate than a 50/50 split male and female posters.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/05/2017 - 13:55

          From our March stats:

          graph

          Facebook:

          graph2

          Instagram:

          graph3

          As for age, it's mostly 25-34, then 35-44:

          graph4

        • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 14:36

          @neil: Thanks for the info, it seems to pretty much back up what I said around the skewing to male. Also, the "teenage boy" comment may have been a throw away line; but it is not far wrong given it is actually "young men".

          I thought I would add in the "commentary" to go with your first graph, from the March posting:
          "I just discovered Google Analytics breaks down male/female demographics (new feature from Sept 16). We are at 82% male (orange), 18% female (green) which is a bit lopsided compared to the general population (close to 50/50)."

          I do love the understatement of the "bit lopsided" comment.

          Does Ozbargain keep its own statistics, broken down on demographics, on postings and comments? That would probably be the interesting one.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/05/2017 - 14:44

          @try2bhelpful:

          Does OzBargain keep its own statistics, broken down on demographics, on postings and comments? That would probably be the interesting one.

          We don't collect that information as we don't ask for gender/age/etc. on signup. I'm not quite sure if I can drill down any further information about age in Analytics. Maybe an Analytics expert here can tell me?

        • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 14:50

          @neil: Might be something worth doing when people sign up. I think most people expect to be asked something like that when they sign up nowdays and it would help you with going back to any advertisers you may use if you have your demographics. It would only need to be male/female and age group. That sort of information is "currency".

        • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 16:07

          @neil:

          Will have to look out for deals on continence aids to boost viewership amongst 65+s!!

        • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 16:08
          +1

          @try2bhelpful:

          It would only need to be male/female and age group.

          What business is it of theirs to fit me into a gender bucket? :/

        • Miss B on 13/05/2017 - 17:30

          @Scrooge McDuck:
          So far in this thread I've seen that you've had a dig at 3 demographics (or more, I may have missed some). At least 2 of the demographics don't regularly frequent the site and I wouldn't be surprised if the 3rd didn't either, although there wouldn't be stats on that. I don't think you're doing it maliciously, but it's a common thing for people to do this on Ozbargain and I imagine it would deter people from those demographics from participating as fully.

        • try2bhelpful on 13/05/2017 - 17:34

          @Scrooge McDuck: You really think that revealing your gender, as part of signing up, is fitting you into a gender bucket?(What does that even mean?) They are not going to sign you up for gender reassignment surgery just understand the demographic of their contributers. I, assume, that this site is partly funded by advertising - I'm sure the advertisers would prefer this sort of information for targeting and it might point to areas of improvement for the site to broaden the range of their contributors.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 13/05/2017 - 18:40

          @Miss B:

          We must be left with the humourful demographic.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 13/05/2017 - 18:49
          +1

          @try2bhelpful:

          Some people want to go about their business without gender being an issue, having to choose something which doesn't fit or having to explain why neither option fits.

        • Miss B on 13/05/2017 - 21:54

          @Scrooge McDuck:
          Sure, people into one particular type of humour.

        • try2bhelpful on 14/05/2017 - 10:27

          @Scrooge McDuck: There is always the option of "prefer not to say", a very valid response. There is also the option of "other" with an explanation. (Might even help the advertisers to realise that having "traditional" families in their advertising might work against them.) Personally I'm a "spectrum" friendly person. What consenting adults do is their own business and we certainly need to support people who are being bullied and harassed. Bring on marriage equality, unisex toilets, equal opportunity for all - no matter where in the spectrum you find yourself. However, the advantage of having demographics is to work out if an imbalance is occuring and, perhaps, investigate why that imbalance might be and what you can do to redress it (if you want to).

    • Online Bathroomware on 12/05/2017 - 14:26
      +2

      A prime example of people negging based on opinion, rather than the value of a deal: https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/279530

      It's this sort of behaviour that puts people off posting deals.

  • scrimshaw on 10/05/2017 - 15:43
    +13

    I've learned to not care about negative votes. People make mistakes, say things they're not supposed to, or haven't got the time to do research, and then say something incorrect; a negative vote just means someone disagrees with you.

    It's a public forum. Of course there will be people who disagree. It would be odd if ozbargain were nothing but a bunch of yes-men and yes-women who agree with each other no matter the discussion

    • Your Friend on 10/05/2017 - 16:12
      +2

      yes I think this is probably the right approach

    • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 10:39
      +4

      I have no problem with people disagreeing with me; it is the manner in which they disagree that I have issues with. If someone can give me a link to a better deal on a product, or has some serious defect with the product or company, that people are putting online then that is OK, but to "neg" it because you, personally, don't have a use for it or don't like it, is insufficient reasons. Personally, I don't think the voting adds to the situation, it is the comments on the products and the links to other deals that are useful. I also have no issue with people pointing out mistakes, but it should be done in the spirit that the poster is doing you a favour and you are just assisting them; rather than abusing them.

  • Savas on 10/05/2017 - 17:41
    +7

    Not a fan of when people make a popular comment, then neg making it difficult to revoke. Sure easternculture's deal might haven't been great, but definitely not worthy of a neg. There are much crappier blatant spam deals posted here everyday that we really should be focusing on so that they are deindexed from deal pages.

  • bluesky on 10/05/2017 - 21:25
    +5

    Like some others, I find the argument that something isn't a bargain, because it is the usual price, to be a bit problematic. Because it is judged from the perspective of someone who already knows about the deal; and perhaps has been a member for a while.

    But Ozbargain is a site with new members joining all the time. As a new member, I would want to know that Wish cards can be obtained for 5% discount, or that ING gives a great trans/savings combo, irrespective of how long this has been the case. They would be genuine deals to the new member.

    What about this idea, which :

    • should stop the "expert" complaining it is usual price and no deal

    • can address somewhat the issue of members being scared of posting due to overly harsh comments/negvotes

    • allow new members more opportunity to see deals that they do not know about (even if they are regular prices by those in the know).

    The idea is to provide a convention to posters to tag a deal, as a beginner deal (i.e targeted to those not considered expert bargainers). How it is implemented is unimportant - something the site administrators can determine. If beginner deals are indicated/highlighted, those considering themselves experts can ignore these deals. Hence, no reason for complains or negvotes.

    A simple implementation which does not involve any code changes could be just a convention in the labelling of deals. E.g. beginner deals may be titled:

    [Beginner] Deal title …

    Sure, it is just an initial thought - I am sure there are lots of practicalities, and issues which will have to be considered as well.

    • Moderatorneil on 10/05/2017 - 22:20

      I'm not entirely sure I understand your comment but we have the following tags for beginners:

      • L — first deal posted by the user
      • P — began posting 2 weeks ago or less
      • P2 — began posting 6 weeks ago or less
      • bluesky on 10/05/2017 - 23:21
        +6

        Sorry if I did not make myself clear.
        I am talking about what try2bhelpful and others commented on above.

        Some deals get lots of harsh comments and negvotes - about them being at the usual or very close to usual price. And these usually come from a few, who already know about the deal, so in their eyes, these are no longer bargains.

        Perhaps whether something is a bargain or not, should not hinge on the judgement of those already in the know (expert or long time members), since a site like OzBargain has members at all levels of bargain hunting skills. For a new member, deals which may have been at regular price for a long time, e.g. the Wish card 5% discount, is still a legitimate bargain.

        In order to cater to the two groups, my proposal is to allow a poster to mark a deal as being targeted to the "common" or "beginner" bargain hunter (C-OzBer), as opposed to the "expert" bargain hunter (E-OzBer).

        My choice of words in the previous comment ("Beginner" deal) is confusing, so I am going to refer to them as the C-OzBer and E-OzBer deal instead.

        • This will forewarn the E-OzBer, so s/he will not waste time going into a C-OzBer deal, and get frustrated and leave harsh comments and negvotes. The E-OzBer will know that it is meant for the C-OzBer, so no need to be so critical.

        • The poster, if unsure about how good the bargain is, now has the option to mark it as a C-OzBer deal - and not be fearful of inviting the harsh criticism that currently scare away many posters, to the point they never post again - which is a loss to other OzBers in general.

        • Ozbargainers, as a whole, also stand to gain - with many more deals.

        Just an example (does not have to be like this) - this deal could be pre-fixed with something, e.g.

        [C-OZBER] FREE Any ATM Usage, Apple/Android Pay, AusPost Transactions & Mo. Acc. Keeping + $0.50 Cashback on EFTPOS Withdrawal ≥$200 @ ING

        which means it may have been available for a while, but still a bargain for others except the E-OzBers. How to tag or denote this, is of course best left to you guys to determine.

        • Wystri Warrick on 11/05/2017 - 03:21
          +4

          I like this idea.
          I've certainly hesitated to post a bargain.

        • bluesky on 11/05/2017 - 11:52
          +1

          I think this suggestion, if implemented, will result in a more conducive environment for beginner/average posters.

          Besides, it is completely optional - if the poster wants to tag the deal as a C-OzBer deal (a signal to "expert" OzBers to be less judgemental, as they are not the target audience). Otherwise, everything else will stay the same as now.

        • Wystri Warrick on 12/05/2017 - 16:59
          +1

          @bluesky: this would really be a great idea, I mean it would be quite similar to how the'subscribe'works to a particular company, to get email notifications.
          I for one would definitely post more deals.

        • Savas on 12/05/2017 - 18:28
          +2

          Honestly people find a deal they think is good please post, don't care what anyone thinks and nothing bad will happen.

        • bluesky on 12/05/2017 - 18:40
          +1

          @Wystri Warrick: Intuitively, I think it will be helpful to both groups (the C-OzBers and E-OzBers). But I do not have the whole picture or stats, to know if the site deem this an issue which warrants any action.

          I have also suggested some small code support to assist the poster - at the
          Comments / Feedback / Suggestions Thread 2017 here, if they decide to address this.

        • AGzee on 17/05/2017 - 03:12
          -2

          @bluesky: I like this idea as I have also witnessed the same thing and then the store was banned. So, far this community has been really good but some names have been regularly putting in harsh and inappropriate comments with negvotes on my deals.

        • spackbace on 18/05/2017 - 01:56
          +2

          @AGzee:

          Maybe if your store didn't spam and sockpuppet you could still post. It has nothing to do with being a new poster.

  • Inzo on 11/05/2017 - 09:02
    +2

    I think in your examples, it's just attitude (is what I have observed)

    The upvvoted comments take the time to explain that this deal is actually only marginally better than the standard deal

    Where as the downvoted ones are a bit blunter, ie "it's only .25% more than standard, hardly a deal worth posting"

  • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 12:57
    -8

    OzB has turned into a liberals cuckfest. I refuse to post any deals and barley comment much anymore. Just come and leech. I'll probably get banned from this since I got a 3 day ban for calling someone a snowflake.

    • try2bhelpful on 12/05/2017 - 13:06
      +3

      If you are only interested in abusing people then maybe you should walk away. I'm here trying to encourage people to contribute by telling them we appreciate their posts, are supporting them and trying to help them; not sure how helpful calling someone a "snowflake" is? I suspect you are trolling; but, unfortunately, there are too many people in society who are metaphorically standing on the pavement and yelling "jump" at the person on the ledge.

      • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 16:34
        -3

        Considering your comment has no context as to what I am referring too, that's kinda hilarious and proves my point. Do you think I just went on a deal, called them a snowflake and then giggled to myself? No doubt, you are under 25 or lacking some I.Q points.

        • Moderatorneil on 12/05/2017 - 16:48

          No doubt, you are under 25 or lacking some I.Q points.

          This is unnecessarily rude and disrespectful. Discussion is fine but when you attack others that is not acceptable.

        • try2bhelpful on 13/05/2017 - 17:27

          I love the fact you complain about the context of the "snowflake" comment, then accuse me of being under 25 or lacking I.Q. points with absolutely no knowledge of me or my background (BTW you are wrong on both counts - you might want to try again). You probably don't even see the whole "kettle" - "pot" situation here. So what is your excuse for making this sort of comment?

        • [Deactivated] on 13/05/2017 - 21:30
          -1

          @try2bhelpful:

          Thats rich. Coming from the guy calling me abusive and unappreciative then making a kettle and pot remark, lol, that is just too good.

          Excuse? Which comment are you referring to? The one you replied to? I don't need any excuse. It's called freedom of speech. Up vote it or go ahead and down vote it. I will not cry about it. OzBargain might ban me though if I were to call you a snowflake, think about that for a second and you may figure out for yourself why I think this community is going down the shitter.

    • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 13:40
      +6

      Doesn't look like you really ever posted deals… So kind of a strange point to make

      • Scrooge McDuck on 12/05/2017 - 16:20
        +2

        Burn! 🔥

      • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 16:31

        From this account that would be correct.

        • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 16:31
          +3

          And the other account would be…?

        • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 16:35
          -3

          @Spackbace:

          That would be totally irrelevant and none of your business.

        • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 16:37
          +2

          @snagseb:

          Completely relevant

        • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 16:39

          @Spackbace:

          Lol, relevant to you so you can see how many deals I've posted? Ummm, no. My comment was not about that, it was directly related to OzB and how bad the community has become.

        • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 16:42
          +2

          @snagseb:

          Relevant in the context of this site and ghost account rules actually.

          You know if you don't like the place you can always delete your account. Looks like you won't be missed :)

        • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 16:46
          -3

          @Spackbace:

          Ghost account? There you go assuming it is an active account. Oops! So once again, irrelevant.

          Would there be a memorial or something if you deleted yours? Hahaha, you'd be missed about as much as I would be. Any more ridiculous passive aggressive comments or are you done now? Maybe time to sit down kid.

        • gimli on 12/05/2017 - 22:31
          +2

          @snagseb: you make jv look good

        • [Deactivated] on 12/05/2017 - 23:43
          -3

          @Gimli:

          Thanks for your totally useless input.

        • lainey13 on 13/05/2017 - 21:14
          +1

          Oh right this is the one you can be nasty from, the other one is actually useful. Gotcha.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join