Re: Rate this post

On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:43:22 -0800, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and Thomas Armagost <silly@xxxxxxxx> instead replied:

In message <mrhtu11a7sgf56c3qecntmqdan7clvfuki@xxxxxxx>,
Ray Haddad <rhaddad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Thomas Armagost" <silly@xxxxxxxx> instead replied:

We've got to beat 'em to the punch.

<http://groups.google.com/group/misc.writing/browse_frm/thread/3aa796ea55f9ecbe/>

See?

[chomp]

How sad that your life seems to revolve around this rating of your
posts here, Thomas.

Do you have any idea how frantic you appear?

Irony, Ray. IRONY! Whooosh!

And you believe this escaped my notice why?

The thing about Google Groups ratings is that NOBODY can be bothered.
Because the entire concept SUCKS. The ratings will amount to nothing
more than a new form of flaming... If they ever catch on at all. That
was my only point. My threadstarter was a PARODY of the desperation
that the chump at Google who implemented this "great idea" must be
feeling now.

Reader ratings work at Slashdot because Slashdot is moderated. The
moderators adjust the score as they see fit.

Bloated Wall Street darling Google should consider implementing the
following rating system for usenet.

Author of message receives the following reward or punishment...

Five stars = Gets to intern for Karl Rowe.

Four stars = Allowed to commit one felony while cops look the other
way.

Three stars = Given condescending faint praise.

Two stars = Beaten by security police while handcuffed to heater
pipe.

One star = Internal organs harvested for transplantation. No
anesthetic.

You're obviously of the same mind as I am regarding this. I have
similar beliefs about the lack of validity of Wiki posts and
references. To prove it, I often go in and change some cite or other
from a Wiki site just to prove how nonsensical it is to quote from
there.

Thomas, I got your irony and was simply poking back at you.
Remember, it was you who used my name in your first post on the
thread. If you weren't trolling for my reply, why do it? Even you're
not stupid enough to believe I'd run over and plug my own posts.
--
Ray
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Motivation behind Magdalenian
    ... to do something with that "star" rating. ... I cannot read any number of stars or even ... The Google rating system ... And when I'm reading other people's posts, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: JSH: Deepening puzzle
    ... Google to display only posts with three or more stars? ... each thread with rated posts shows some ... averaged rating for the rated posts in the thread. ... each message's individual rating is displayed. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Have fun messing with Phils Google Groups rating
    ... Anyway, although one is not allowed to rate one's own posts, it seems ... by using a second account to rate all his own posts with five stars. ... Yesterday I tested this proposition by rating about thirty of Phil's ... It would be fun, but were I to join this project I'd have to reduce the time I spend playing solitaire, so I must decline. ...
    (sci.lang.japan)
  • Re: About this group
    ... Of the most frequent posters several have somehow been given ... but most everybody who has a "rating" is rated 3 stars out of 5. ... effort of rating posts just to stick them with a "3". ...
    (rec.outdoors.fishing.fly)
  • Re: Rate this post
    ... How sad that your life seems to revolve around this rating of your ... posts here, Thomas. ...
    (misc.writing)