http://slashdot.org/ is there some way of implementing a post rating system like that used on slashdot? they rate comments on a topic as "Funny, Informative, Insightful..etc" along with giving each comment a score(1-5). then you can sort through the comments using this criteria. this system allows you to quickly scans threads for relavent information, and parse out the trash.
I give your post a 3. Yes, it might be cool, but it would overload the servers even more and people would get upset with others who gave them a low rating. (BBall fans are prickly.) (You came close to a 4 as I was ready to add an extra point for using the word parse... but then I saw you misspelled relevant, so it stays at a 3.)
1. Sounds like too much work to vote. 2. Would have many of the same problems I see with voting on threads -- partisan voting, voting on the news instead of the conversation, and polarized voting (that people will only vote 1 or 5).
When the thread voting was first brought up by Clutch, I suggested that only the mods or some assigned posters should have the voting privilege. I think that would make the ratings mean a lot more.
I see none of you guys are actually familiar with Slashdot's rating system. Slashdot's moderation system is the best rating system I've seen on the Internet and it's not even close. It makes it incredibly easy to identify quality posts and filter out garbage. The moderation is anonymous so there is no chance for backlash as some have suggested. And by using a meta-moderation system, they avoid prevalence of groupthink and the suppression of unpopular views like you see on sites like digg. The result is that the discussions you find at Slashdot are the most intelligent, humorous and insightful threads you'll find anywhere on the web. Of course, it took them a couple of years to perfect that system, and asking to implement that sort of moderation system on a message board is a major request in terms of the coding effort involved, so I'm going to guess the short answer will be "no."
Oh ... the other thing that makes Slashdot's system really work is: Not everyone has the ability to rate threads. Posters with lots of positive karma are randomly selected and given "mod points" from time to time, which they can use to moderate threads. Also by rule you are not allowed to reply to a post after you have moderated it. You earn good karma by posting high quality posts that earn positive moderation, so the feedback system works nicely. A much bigger selection of users are allowed to meta-moderate afterwards (which involves looking at a list of moderation actions and determining if the moderation was fair or not).
Wouldn't go that far. By rule most 1-star threads are in fact dumb, most 5-star threads are in fact awesome, and most 3-star threads are in fact controversial. It's far from perfect but it isn't entirely useless either.
