Jump to content

Blocking Negative Bookmark Lists


bullit

Recommended Posts

 

This would allow unrated bookmark lists to show up, (I suspect the vast majority of bookmark lists are unrated) and the purely negative bookmark lists will quickly aquire a "not useful" rating from annoyed cache owners that will push them off the cache page.

 

Nope, rating has one major problem... people with too much time on their hands can rate something over and over and over in order to achieve their desired outcome. This won't work because, sooner or later, someone who thinks a bookmark their cache appears on is negative, will spend the few minutes to neg-rep the bookmark out of existence.

 

One account can only rate a bookmark list once. Only paying members can rate a bookmark.

 

You can, however, get all of your friends to rate a list.

Link to comment

Bookmarks have been a pain in my side for some time. I have seen several placed on cache pages for the sole purpose of making people angry or to further whatever point of view they wish to share with the world about how caching SHOULD be done. Come on how is a public bookmark called "Hated Caches and owners I will avoid caches for" a reasonable use of the function?

This is a fix that needs to be addressed. A cache owner should be able to turn off any PUBLIC bookmark on their page.

Link to comment

Well the problem with listing it publicly is that I will end up with these type of lists on my own caches.

I did email it to the contact address a few minutes ago however...

The original ticket number for the email was Ticket ID: QUU-707314

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment
Negative or not Travel Bug PRISON is the name that has become common useage for TB "hotels" with restrictions.

 

Positive vs Negative casting of caches is the whole point of the thread. Criminal even calls them good caches and bad caches. Bad is also a negative term.

 

This isn't only about my cache, this pertains to all the negative bookmark lists out there.

 

Why does everything in life have to be good and positive? I think the negative bookmark list serves a purpose. The purpose being for you to change how your cache operates. Is the purpose of your hotel to get as many TB's as possible in it or to move as many TB's as possible???

 

I had a public bookmark list that showed my FTF's.. At first I didn't think it was a big deal, until I started getting negative reviews on my bookmark list. I changed them to private lists and the problem was solved. Even though the reaction from the geocaching community was negative, it served its purpose. Maybe you should look at this as the public offering their opinion of how you have your cache setup? Maybe you should consider "fixing" what is perceived as wrong.. Otherwise, you'll just have to deal with the bookmark list on your cache.

Link to comment

 

I'd suggest the bookmark show on the cache page, unless

  • It's been rated by 5 or more people.
  • It has a "useful" percentage of less than 50%.

This is pretty fair. If there are less than 5 ratings it shows up. If 5 ratings or more the usefulness needs to be above 50% to be shown on the page. Thanks!

If the rating goes above 90% the bookmark owner can delete the cache in question at his or her option. Yeah, I like that. B)B)

:) Maybe you could get a B) smiley for finding one of those caches! B) I actually wish we could pick the smiley for each cache, but that is a topic for another thread....
Link to comment

I agree with CR, bookmark lists should only be able to be edited by the creator of the list. If the creator of the list chooses to make the list known to the public, then that's his/her choice and nobody else should have a say in it.

 

I that a bookmark list is nobody's business but the bookmark makers. However should a cache owner have their cache page branded with variations of "this cache sucks"? You have the bookmark list superimposed on the cache owners page with no input from the cache owner.

 

It's akin to someone being able to tag your door with their grafitti.

 

The general idea of bookmarks is great. There are now some specific abuses.

 

It could be balanced by bookmarks of bookmarks or bookmark notes where cache owners got to give their feedback to the feedback that's stuck on their page.

 

The main problem is that it's one sided. "Your cache sucks" and there is no where to say "well your bookmark sucks worse".

 

Edit: Looks like you can review bookmarks. Nevermind.

Link to comment
I think the best way to eliminate negative bookmark list feedback is to hide every cache with the goal of having it make someone's "favorite caches" bookmark list.
I couldn't agree more! :)

Funny you should dig up this quote from September. Between then and now, I've had one of my bookmark lists reviewed negatively. The list recognizes the caches that are, in my opinion, the best that I've found in their particular area of Pennsylvania. Apparently this is a "brag list" that simply "clutters up the cache page." B) I meant it as a compliment.

 

People will complain about pretty much anything. So should my complimentary bookmark list get censored because one person didn't like it? OK, so at what point on the slippery slope does the answer change?

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

Link to comment
I think the best way to eliminate negative bookmark list feedback is to hide every cache with the goal of having it make someone's "favorite caches" bookmark list.
I couldn't agree more! B)

Funny you should dig up this quote from September. Between then and now, I've had one of my bookmark lists reviewed negatively. The list recognizes the caches that are, in my opinion, the best that I've found in their particular area of Pennsylvania. Apparently this is a "brag list" that simply "clutters up the cache page." :) I meant it as a compliment.

 

People will complain about pretty much anything. So should my complimentary bookmark list get censored because one person didn't like it? OK, so at what point on the slippery slope does the answer change?

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

We had some troll do the same thing with a bunch of people's favorites but we just ignored it. We all basically agree on caches have gone the extra mile and can provide some real enjoyment for most people. It's always fun to go to events and tell people "You gotta do _____ cache! It's a blast" Stuff like that energizes the game! I also like the idea of showing the bookmarks in order of the ones that have the most thumbs up! B)
Link to comment

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

 

The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link). My memory is fuzzy whether I sorted the bookmark lists by the most popular however.

Link to comment

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

 

The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link). My memory is fuzzy whether I sorted the bookmark lists by the most popular however.

Thanks Jeremy! This is a nice enhancement! :)

 

Edit: I just checked the #1 cache in the SD Favorites list. It has 15 bookmarks. The first three bookmarks on that cache page are rated: 1) 6/8, 2) 6/7 and 3) 8/8. So they aren't in order but at least the lower rated ones are moved to the bottom! B)

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

 

The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link). My memory is fuzzy whether I sorted the bookmark lists by the most popular however.

Thanks for that update. I believe that, in the absence of negative reviews, the bookmarks continue to be listed in the order in which they were created. So, because negative reviews are not that common, I didn't notice any difference.

 

In my example from above, the negative feedback was countered by a positive remark from a cache owner, so the list rating is at 50%. But what if it wasn't? Is a *single* negative comment enough to bump a bookmark off the cache pages intended to be honored and complimented through inclusion on a "best" list? There ought to be a minimum number of votes required before that happens. Otherwise our troll friends will merrily run around downgrading bookmark lists, and bookmark list owners will write and ask their friends to vote them back up. Seems like a waste of time. Natural selection through an adequate sample size would be better.

Link to comment

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

 

The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link). My memory is fuzzy whether I sorted the bookmark lists by the most popular however.

Thanks for that update. I believe that, in the absence of negative reviews, the bookmarks continue to be listed in the order in which they were created. So, because negative reviews are not that common, I didn't notice any difference.

 

In my example from above, the negative feedback was countered by a positive remark from a cache owner, so the list rating is at 50%. But what if it wasn't? Is a *single* negative comment enough to bump a bookmark off the cache pages intended to be honored and complimented through inclusion on a "best" list? There ought to be a minimum number of votes required before that happens. Otherwise our troll friends will merrily run around downgrading bookmark lists, and bookmark list owners will write and ask their friends to vote them back up. Seems like a waste of time. Natural selection through an adequate sample size would be better.

If you ordered them by the most positive votes then that would stop the trolls.
Link to comment

 

I liked the idea of downrating a bookmark list so that only the favorably rated lists show up on the "front" (the cache page) and the rest appear on the click-through page. I still like it, and hope to see this feature in a future site update once the current round of behind the scenes, under the hood changes are finished.

 

The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link). My memory is fuzzy whether I sorted the bookmark lists by the most popular however.

 

I think that it is not (sorted, that is). They appear to be listed in the order that they were created or something like that.

 

(I'm just trying to be helpful. Please don't change things abruptly and let everyone believe that I am a paranoid schizo)

Link to comment

If you ordered them by the most positive votes then that would stop the trolls.

Trolls are in the eyes of the reader. If you don't like the vote it must be trolls. That always seems to be the easy way out.

 

I know of some bookmarks lists that have a negative rating. The owners would call it trolls, the voters would tell you the list is not benificial to anyone else but the lister and that it should be a private list.

Link to comment

If you ordered them by the most positive votes then that would stop the trolls.

Trolls are in the eyes of the reader. If you don't like the vote it must be trolls. That always seems to be the easy way out.

 

I know of some bookmarks lists that have a negative rating. The owners would call it trolls, the voters would tell you the list is not benificial to anyone else but the lister and that it should be a private list.

There are trolls out there and they can screw up a perfectly good list if they wanted to. I like the idea of trying to keep things positive by showing the bookmarks with the most positive ratings first. Positive reinforcement will go a long way to urge people to make better caches so they appear on more people's favorites lists. However, I also like the idea of being able to see the negative bookmarks that may have a lot of people agreeing with them. If enough people agree with these then they are probably valid and should move up the list. By ordering bookmarks with the most thumbs up votes it would also stop the cache owner and friends trying to be reverse-trolls and get a negative bookmark list moved down the list! So the net result is the the top bookmarks are the ones that show the dominate consensus view of that cache! This is useful info! B) Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

OK the list I mentioned the title of only above is still on the page and has only two reviews (both negative). Did I misread what was changed; should a list having only two remarks both negative still be on the page?

 

Granted you have to click on the "More" in the bookmark box to find it....but you had to do that before as well as there are several bookmarks on the page.

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment
OK the list I mentioned the title of only above is still on the page and has only two reviews (both negative). Did I misread what was changed; should a list having only two remarks both negative still be on the page?

Granted you have to click on the "More" in the bookmark box to find it....but you had to do that before as well as there are several bookmarks on the page.

Did you read what Jeremy wrote?
The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link).
Link to comment
OK the list I mentioned the title of only above is still on the page and has only two reviews (both negative). Did I misread what was changed; should a list having only two remarks both negative still be on the page?

Granted you have to click on the "More" in the bookmark box to find it....but you had to do that before as well as there are several bookmarks on the page.

Did you read what Jeremy wrote?
The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link).

Yes I read it I just misunderstood what he wrote.

 

This is a step in the right direction but I'd still like them to go away altogether at the cache owners discretion. Thanks Jeremy for making this change.

Link to comment
OK the list I mentioned the title of only above is still on the page and has only two reviews (both negative). Did I misread what was changed; should a list having only two remarks both negative still be on the page?

Granted you have to click on the "More" in the bookmark box to find it....but you had to do that before as well as there are several bookmarks on the page.

Did you read what Jeremy wrote?
The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link).

I am seeing lists that have 4 or 5 thumbs down and not a single thumbs up still showing on the cache page. If it is the only list then it shows up?

Link to comment
OK the list I mentioned the title of only above is still on the page and has only two reviews (both negative). Did I misread what was changed; should a list having only two remarks both negative still be on the page?

Granted you have to click on the "More" in the bookmark box to find it....but you had to do that before as well as there are several bookmarks on the page.

Did you read what Jeremy wrote?
The 50% threshold was implemented - The idea where if the rating drops to below 50% it is dropped off the actual cache page (though it remains on a separate link).

I am seeing lists that have 4 or 5 thumbs down and not a single thumbs up still showing on the cache page. If it is the only list then it shows up?

In order for a bookmark list to show up on the main cache page it has to have >=50% thumbs up ratings. If it has less than 50%, then you have to click on the link to see that bookmark.
Link to comment

Yep I looked at the bookmark in question and in fact it still showed up on the page even though all thumbs were down....I added a positive rating as a test and it still showed on the page even though it had one positive and 4 negatives...looks like this isn't functioning yet?

 

I removed my bookmark remarks and rating after seeing no change .....

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment

In order for a bookmark list to show up on the main cache page it has to have >=50% thumbs up ratings. If it has less than 50%, then you have to click on the link to see that bookmark.

It doesn't appear that is entirely correct. Here is a link to a cache page with a non-usefull bookmark list. It has 4 ratings, all negative. It isn't trols, but rather honest votes by people who do not think this services any useful purpose to others. It is a private list and should remain so rather than being a tattoo on a cache owner's page. et it still shows on the page. Shouldn't it be off the page since it have nothing but a negative rating?

 

Cache page

Link to comment

In order for a bookmark list to show up on the main cache page it has to have >=50% thumbs up ratings. If it has less than 50%, then you have to click on the link to see that bookmark.

It doesn't appear that is entirely correct. Here is a link to a cache page with a non-usefull bookmark list. It has 4 ratings, all negative. It isn't trols, but rather honest votes by people who do not think this services any useful purpose to others. It is a private list and should remain so rather than being a tattoo on a cache owner's page. et it still shows on the page. Shouldn't it be off the page since it have nothing but a negative rating?

Cache page

Hmmm. it looks like it is going to show the top 3 bookmarks regardless....Does anyone have a cache page with 4 or more bookmarks with one of them with less than 50% thumbs ups to test that theory?

 

BTW, I could care less about an FTF list but I probably would abstain from rating it...

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

BTW, I could care less about an FTF list but I probably would abstain from rating it.

Agreed this isn't a horrible tag but it is a good example for the sake of a demonstration about the negative vs positive reviews.

I think we need a better example. This one isn't the least bit bothersome in my opinion....
Link to comment

BTW, I could care less about an FTF list but I probably would abstain from rating it.

Agreed this isn't a horrible tag but it is a good example for the sake of a demonstration about the negative vs positive reviews.

I think we need a better example. This one isn't the least bit bothersome in my opinion....

 

Actually, FTF bookmark lists annoy the heck out of me B) But no, that is not a good example.

 

I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....

Link to comment

BTW, I could care less about an FTF list but I probably would abstain from rating it.

Agreed this isn't a horrible tag but it is a good example for the sake of a demonstration about the negative vs positive reviews.

I think we need a better example. This one isn't the least bit bothersome in my opinion....

 

Actually, FTF bookmark lists annoy the heck out of me B) But no, that is not a good example.

 

I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....

It is a very good example. It shows how the function of a bookmark list having more negative reviews than positive reviews remains on the cache page when it appears it should be dropped off..

 

The list itself is a different subject. The ratings are based on usefullness. I personally have never found anyone's FTF list or anything else that resembles that, useful. What do I care whether you found this or that first? I will say that I do not want it on my cache page. Say what you want in the log. That is what it is there for, but keep things like this on a personal list, not force it onto another cache page.

Link to comment
It is a very good example. It shows how the function of a bookmark list having more negative reviews than positive reviews remains on the cache page when it appears it should be dropped off..
Sheesh! Give Jeremy some time to work out the kinks. He just made a quick change this morning....

 

Anyhow, so far I have not seen any bookmark list that really "needs" to be hidden. Even if we think that the FTF list is not useful there are others that like to toot their own horns and get attention by posting stuff like that. Maybe if we shine the spotlight on them and we all give them a standing ovation, they will no longer have the need to post bookmarks like that. B)

Link to comment

BTW, I could care less about an FTF list but I probably would abstain from rating it.

Agreed this isn't a horrible tag but it is a good example for the sake of a demonstration about the negative vs positive reviews.

I think we need a better example. This one isn't the least bit bothersome in my opinion....

 

Actually, FTF bookmark lists annoy the heck out of me :) But no, that is not a good example.

 

I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....

It is a very good example. It shows how the function of a bookmark list having more negative reviews than positive reviews remains on the cache page when it appears it should be dropped off..

 

The list itself is a different subject. The ratings are based on usefullness. I personally have never found anyone's FTF list or anything else that resembles that, useful. What do I care whether you found this or that first? I will say that I do not want it on my cache page. Say what you want in the log. That is what it is there for, but keep things like this on a personal list, not force it onto another cache page.

 

Hmm. I did not look at the ratings for the bookmark list in question. If the phrase used for rating them is "useful", then FTF bookmark lists are not useful, in my opinion. Not by any means. Personally, I find them obnoxious, tacky, and nothing but public "chest-thumping", but I don't consider them "negative bookmark lists", in the same context the OP of this thread was using.

 

But seeing as the conversation here turned to a lists with a certain percentage of negative ratings, and the Big Guy himself seems to endorse this, get it offa there! B)

 

Oh, the last time I made a similiar statement about FTF bookmark lists in these forums? It resulted in 2 negative ratings posted to "Urkel's big list o' favorite caches" bookmark list, on the same day. So The Leprechauns may have a point with the "troll factor".

Edited by TheWhiteUrkel
Link to comment
I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....
I have looked and I can't find any bookmarks like that in our area.....

Here ya' go. Not that I have a problem with it :)
I think that bookmark list would be quite useful! B)
Link to comment
Oh, the last time I made a similiar statement about FTF bookmark lists in these forums? It resulted in 2 negative ratings posted to "Urkel's big list o' favorite caches" bookmark list, on the same day. So The Leprechauns may have a point with the "troll factor".
Funny how that works....I see that your list now has an 80% approval rating! B) I guess there are also llorts out there! :)
Link to comment
I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....
I have looked and I can't find any bookmarks like that in our area.....

Here ya' go. Not that I have a problem with it :)
I think that bookmark list would be quite useful! B)

Too bad he can't update it anymore. B)

Link to comment
I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....
I have looked and I can't find any bookmarks like that in our area.....

Here ya' go. Not that I have a problem with it <_<
I think that bookmark list would be quite useful! :ph34r:

Too bad he can't update it anymore. :wub:

Why can't he?
Link to comment
I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....
I have looked and I can't find any bookmarks like that in our area.....

Here ya' go. Not that I have a problem with it <_<
I think that bookmark list would be quite useful! :ph34r:

Too bad he can't update it anymore. :wub:

Why can't he?

Banned Premium Member.

Link to comment
I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....
I have looked and I can't find any bookmarks like that in our area.....

Here ya' go. Not that I have a problem with it <_<
I think that bookmark list would be quite useful! :ph34r:

Too bad he can't update it anymore. :wub:

Why can't he?

Banned Premium Member.
I've never noticed someone being banned before. I wonder what he did....They didn't delete his questionable bookmark so it must have been something else....
Link to comment
I specifically remember TPTB being very cautious and saying they would re-evaluate the situation if abuse ever took place in great numbers, like "Lame caches", "stupid caches", "caches that suck", etc....
I have looked and I can't find any bookmarks like that in our area.....

Here ya' go. Not that I have a problem with it :ph34r:
I think that bookmark list would be quite useful! :wub:

Too bad he can't update it anymore. :lol:

Why can't he?

Banned Premium Member.
I've never noticed someone being banned before. I wonder what he did....They didn't delete his questionable bookmark so it must have been something else....

 

Oh, believe me. It was something else <_< . You've never noticed a banned user? It happens. Almost exclusively resulting from shenanigans here in these forums. On the bright side, at least this thread has generated lots of recent feedback to the linked list. :wub:

Link to comment

Is there any value in restricting someone from adding a cache to a PUBLIC bookmark list if they have NOT found the cache?

 

I understand that bookmarks are used for a bunch of different things, but should someone really be putting a cache on a public list if they haven't actually found it?

 

Sure...

Public Bookmark list of all of the APE caches (I own one)

Public Bookmark list of a local club's favorite caches (I own one)

 

A Bookmark list can be ANYTHING that ties caches together. It can be "caches that are along interstate 276 that I plan on doing with a group of cachers on Martin Luther King's birthday. Why limit the usage to JUST ones you've found?

Link to comment

Is there any value in restricting someone from adding a cache to a PUBLIC bookmark list if they have NOT found the cache?

 

I understand that bookmarks are used for a bunch of different things, but should someone really be putting a cache on a public list if they haven't actually found it?

 

Guilty several times over of this one.

UK night only caches, UK's hardest caches, find the travel bugs first caches, historic caches throughout the world

All get good feedback and regular emails with additions / mistakes.

Link to comment

Is there any value in restricting someone from adding a cache to a PUBLIC bookmark list if they have NOT found the cache?

 

I understand that bookmarks are used for a bunch of different things, but should someone really be putting a cache on a public list if they haven't actually found it?

 

Personally I'd think a value argue would be better if you focus on the what list is used for. Is a bookmark list of caches that have 'blue' in the name of value?? Hopefully the person that made the list find is it interesting/usefull, but I figure most people probably don't care. I realize everyone gets to make whatever bookmarks they like, but I wish they made the ones I have find valueless as private ones so it doesn't take up cachepage space. The problem is of course what is any given bookmarks value, and to whom?

Link to comment

Wonderful replies. Thank you. I see that this, like a lot of other issues in this "game", turn into "eye of the beholder" questions. What is negative to one person can be a positive to another.

 

Thanks, again, for hearing me out and commenting!

That's a pretty accurate perception. The problem will always be in the beholder wanting to control other folks' perception of their whatever... in this case, their caches.

 

You can't please everyone. So for those upset with their perception of a negative bookmark, get over it. It's just an opinion.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...