jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (9 posts)

Initial Vote in Answers Should Be Neutral, not +1

  1. melbel profile image91
    melbelposted 4 years ago

    Normally, I don't particularly care for voting thingies where you can publicly see if x amount of people think what you said is awesome and y amount of people think what you said is epic FAIL, but I was in the answer section a bit ago and someone asked about clicking adsense ads.

    One of the answers was something along the lines of it being okay to click ads here and that it may even be okay to click your own ads. It of course was severely down-voted, but all answers regardless of what is said is automatically given a +1, so this answer was like +1, -12 or something... but let's say no other hubbers saw this answer... it would have remained a +1. Then passersby might assume this answer is somehow good.

    I think answers should start out neutral. I know it's kind of a petty thing to notice, but eh, it's just a thought.

    1. lobobrandon profile image81
      lobobrandonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      If that's the case people shouldn't be able to vote on their own answers as well. Because, they'll plus one their own..

    2. brittanytodd profile image93
      brittanytoddposted 4 years ago in reply to this


  2. whoisbid profile image77
    whoisbidposted 4 years ago

    Plus 1 is the same as the "likes" but facebook beat google to it

    1. lobobrandon profile image81
      lobobrandonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      +1 is better than like... You say like if you like it.. and +1 if you vote for it. BTW what do you say about this whoisbid?

  3. WriteAngled profile image92
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    This just highlights the stupidity of these voting systems and using social networking as a creator of value. Just because people "like" an answer does not mean it is correct. Yet everywhere, we are seeing this business of establishing knowledge by committee rather than by proper authority.

    Google adds to this ridiculous situation by giving immense prominence in search results to "knowledge by committee" sites such as Yahoo Answers and Wikipedia.

    1. melbel profile image91
      melbelposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Just the other day, I was talking with my dad about SOPA and he goes to look it up and his search led him to Yahoo Answers.

      Me: No, go back, there's nothing here.
      Dad: No, see, someone answered the person's question.
      Me: (before reading anything) It's wrong!

      It's kind of funny how I assume the answer is wrong just because it's on YA. A generalization, I know, but I haven't seen anyone with credentials really answering questions there.

      1. Mighty Mom profile image92
        Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Great topic, Melbel.
        As one of those old school/old timers who existed personally and professionally happily for years before the Internet, I'm shocked (and NOT awed) by what comes up on Google search results.
        It's so sad when you have to scroll beyond 2 pages to find ANY credible answers to a legitimate question.
        These so-called news sites are really nothing more than opinion sites.
        And we all know the old comparison between opinions and a certain body part.

        +1000 (I think this is a super answer and I hope everyone else will LIKE it, too!) lol lol

  4. relache profile image87
    relacheposted 4 years ago

    I agree that initial answers should have neutral weight.  Just because someone answered shouldn't mean it gets automatic support.