Should ethics really allow negative votes to be valid in a site about legitimate bargains?
It's essentially imposing your own views on OzBargain and labeling a deal as bad because of how you see things.
Examples are the recent caged egg deals.
Soon there will be vegans that vote against every meat-related deal because of what they believe in.
Where do we draw the line?
Now that's been said, let's hope some of the comments are going to be helpful ;-)
I guess if we’re being serious… we cannot police the reasoning behind each vote with out asking further questions as to why that vote was placed. We must simply hope that if there is significant volume rejecting a deal, then that matches the sentiment of the majority of ozbargain faithful - no matter if the reason is ethical or numerical in basis. I seriously doubt the vegan masses want to prioritise ozbargain negging as the path to an animal cruelty free world.
Indeed, except individuals matter less now. What the rules have to control is 'vegan' mass botnets, paid for by organised crime-gangs working on giga-funded political campaigns (and other marketing efforts) which may be attempting to swing the outcomes of elections at any one time. Typically by 'contributing' to online communities such as OzB that clock up the screentime of their most targeted demographics.
To remain valid, the scoring system needs to have filters to prevent abuse, like a list of reasons for making your vote. And it needs to be good, else people will vote less
we cannot police the reasoning behind each vote with out asking further questions as to why that vote was placed.
There are already guidelines for what are valid and invalid neg votes.
If something is a deal is based on a lot more things than just monetary cost. It is an exaggeration, nowdays, but if someone was selling small children to work down coalmines I think they would probably get a lot of downvotes. Then again this is Ozbargain, so maybe they wouldn't. I'm not sure why people get so obsessed by downvotes, or negative comments for that matter. It is up to people to take into account all the things associated with a deal and then make up their own minds. Personally I think that the price on the birds for cage eggs is too high; if people decide that they still don't care it is all about the money then that is their choice. However, that does not stop me supporting organisations that try to improve the lot of farm animals. I'm not vegetarian but I do try to shop in such a way that animals exploited for my needs are treated as humanely as possible. Society changes overtime, things considered PC become mainstream. Things like dog fighting, cock fighting etc are now illegal - where they were once mainstream entertainment. If you go back to Roman times the entertainments were horrific, by modern standards. I think, eventually, caged birds will be phased out.
Personally, I post a deal, make my point and then leave it to the masses to use as they will.
People in sweatshops make clothes in worse conditions than caged hens so i don't understand why people only care about chickens.
You know, I really don't think the sweatshop conditions are worse than caged hens. Haven't seen them, actually, mutilating the sweatshop people. However, the "whataboutism" doesn't negate my original point this is just another thing that needs to be dealt with, properly.
i think those people working in factories are a lot worse off that chickens that get to do nothing all day.
The OP, specifically mentioned the issue of caged hens in his original piece; hence me addressing that. As I indicated, above, your whataboutism is merely a distraction.
However, the "whataboutism"
It's not "whataboutism" when the same people whining on cage egg deals also upvote sweatshop deals.
@try2bhelpful, C'mon man - you're taking the mickey saying such a clearly untrue thing. I don't think anyone logical would really try and compare the two for any number of reasons. So maybe check your facts before saying such silly things.
Exactly what is the untruth? Personally I'm not in favour of either situation.
Because it's trendy. And social media allows people to be outraged on behalf of others and pile on bashing whom the mob are demonising.
Its no different to kids getting together to bully the weak kids.
??? Whats trendy?
You're talking in very broad generalities - what specifically, and maybe use the example the OP gave if that makes it easier - is the same with kids being bullied in school and that?
I'm not connecting the dots - and seems completely different to me.
??? Whats trendy?
Picking a cause, like caged eggs, then being hypocritical and buying clothes which are made by people in factories which are akin the caged chooks.
I'm not connecting the dots - and seems completely different to me.
Thats possibly because you read my comments without relating it to the post I was replying too?
Your voting guidelines end where my feelings begin
Mentioned this before but neil denied it. We only need to look at the two caged egg threads and see that 'ethical neg votes' is a free pass to crap on any thread.
Look at previous deals on free gloves, Gilette , guns & scope deals, Jaycar
Its become too much work for them to remove "invalid negs" and hence the free reign it now has.
I reported invalid negs in the past based on the Voting Guidelines at the time, and no action was taken. Reason: "unless its worded a specific way, the neg votes stay".
I reported invalid negs
Even if it's dumb logic i don't think you can say that their neg vote is "invalid".
at the time (before the Neg Vote Guidelines became a War & Peace book) valid neg votes can only be of a very specific criteria, anything else is invalid.
-cheaper elsewhere
-fraudulent/scam warning
-item not as described/faulty/knockoff
The mods here have enough to do without having to pander to such lame complaints.
In business you'll often tell employees, don't come to me with a problem - come with a solution. So you tell us how the mods would EVER be able to discern the basis for anyone downvoting any deal.
IMHO it's unenforceable and you're putting them in an impossible situation on the basis of non-situation for 99.9% of people here.
The mods here have enough to do without having to pander to such lame complaints.
Why are you typing on behalf of them, are you their Rep?
I am coming up with the solution.
Its very enforceable if a valid neg can only be of the three criteria above, anything else is an ethical dumpster fire best avoided. Make the message clear that ethical neg votes is not acceptable.
There is little penalty in spamming ethical neg votes and hence its now the norm.
@payton: Yes, I'm their rep. ;-)
Where did I say I was writing on behalf of them? I was expressing an speculative opinion, perhaps apply a lil more common sense to your remarks.
No, you've not got a realistic solution. As lets say I have an issue with the deal I'll just neg it and pick any of those 3 criteria - how can you prove I'm 'baseless' in doing so?
Spamming ethical neg votes? Where are you getting this from? This is some Trumpian/fake news stuff…..now the norm, be serious - those deals had a small number of negative votes and you're making out like there's hordes of people jumping in voting neg and then buggering off. It's just not the case.
Seems to me you're more upset people see things different from yourself - as I'd also put it to you that not only do you not have a vaguely viable solution but there actually is NO problem as the system put in place by the mods, works very well.
Oh okay. Maybe we should go back to the original way it was 10 years ago where you could just neg without commenting and then we wouldn't have all these arguments.
@Savas: So wheres your solution?
You can just make ANY comment and neg - so where's your solution?
Psssst - here's a tip - THERE ISN"T ONE. The mods here are smart, they know their stuff and for legit problems they put rules and measures in place to curb them. But some stuff isn't much of an issue and others just aren't realistic to solve, this IMHO falls into both of those latter two areas and whats in place at present tends to work pretty well.
Again - why not go and put up a logical, fact based argument instead of asking for others to solve your 'problems'?
@Daniel Plainview: I'm happy with the way things are now. I don't know what we'd need a solution for.
You can hardly get on your soapbox about this when there's people getting their comments downvoted for anything and everything thats NOT in accordance with OzB's rules/guidelines for voting.
I don't see it as an issue and CERTAINLY not a big enough one that its need a change done to it and lets face it - it's unenforceable as people can just downvote anything without providing a basis for doing so.
If you really feel ever so strongly about the matter I'd suggest you come up with a factually based argument to counter that of those you disagree with - pretty basic but why not start there instead of wanting a rule change just as you've got your panties in a knot.
instead of wanting a rule change just as you've got your panties in a knot.
No, the said rules had shifted and OP wanted it back the way it was before.
Couple of years back there were no proliferation of 'feelingz votes' because it got cleaned up quick.
Yeah so they want a rule change. The rules are a certain way NOW and the OP wants them CHANGED. Pretty clear cut.
And OP FWIW if you really want anyone to take your poll seriously as anything other than whinging maybe try and pose your question in a vaguely objective manner, instead of angling it completely from your own perspective. There's nothing wrong with stating that you the OP feel a certain way but thats just a straight up hatchet job posing as a poll.
Like I said get over it and if it's a real issue go back to the thread you're aggrieved over and put up a solid fact based argument - IMHO crying to the ref indicates an inability to do so.
What happened to the freedom of speech? I thought everyone had a say, whether you like it or not.
Or do you want to silence opinions that don't match what you believe?
you can type whatever you want - your freedom of speech.
putting a neg vote on top is different matter
Why don't you take your own advice and instead of complaining about wanting the entire system changed to suit YOU - go back and write what you want i.e a logic based argument - in whatever the threads are that are sticking in your craw.
Problem solved.
why are you so desperate? If you don't like the discussion, jog on?
@payton: Are you talking to me or out loud to yourself here? ;-)
Quick tip, leading by example works better than a do as I say, not as I do approach.
@Daniel Plainview: Re-read your heavily negged comments here and its pretty obvious who is desperate to spam replies and "win" an argument.
@payton: Play the ball and not the man - was the advice I had but hey if you think thats a good 'shot' at me - then it shows how weak your argument is.
Does anyone ever intend to 'lose' an argument? Seems very odd…so yes I like to win them - as I only get involved in ones I feel I'm on the right side of, doing otherwise would be akin to trolling.
Spam replies? I don't understand the context - I think you'll find wherever I reply to people I tend to put a considerable amount of effort in - IMHO spamming replies would be just taking pot shots, making baseless comments etc to try and divert the discussion of course.
Thats what people usually do when they don't have a very strong point or the capacity to back it up - so feel free to go look for whatever you think you need do tenously support your point…..I'll stick with the discussion thats on topic as I've little interest in sifting through your entrails.
FWIW the proof is in the pudding - as they say and Aliexpress ended up giving me a 50% refund on those items, so negged I may have been but my complaints were found to be founded. How you like them apples!
Maybe someone is in the market for caged eggs and the neg vote doesn't actually have anything to do with if it's a good deal or not.
true, in the past neg votes was a solid indicator whether a deal is a great bargain or not.
Really? This is something you're seriously expecting people to take as your point? Are you sure?
Cause to me once you say something silly like this it undermines the rest of your argument.
I think you'd find with any deal people who are legit interested will look in the thread and also click through onto the deal. I don't think you can say that anyone who was really into caged eggs - could view that thread and come away thinking the eggs weren't good caged eggs. As lets face it caged eggs are all about price - not the egg quality and certainly not the method of production - so they saw them at $1.60 & $2 and that is the deal to those individuals.
IMHO you're more up in arms that people sought to discuss that the basis of a deal being good or bad is about more than just the price alone. And sorry but you can do that in any thread on OzB at present.
So I'm pretty sure you can rest easy knowing that nobody would have missed out on their cheap caged eggs, IF thats what they wanted just from a handful of people clicking a certain way instead of what you seem to have wanted them to do.
I question the need for neg votes instead of just not voting. Remove negs altogether I say.
What if the deal is crap?
It gets no positive votes……
What if it gets some upvotes and then someone finds it cheaper? If a person negs then readers can go to the neg and see the problem, otherwise they might miss that comment and buy the deal.
@andy19363: So wow first time I've heard about this 'I agree' neg trend. Do you have some examples?
Also and you've raised this but are you saying that this ALSO happens with positive votes as well? As presumably these rotten 'I agree' types are jumping on the back and voting up deals that don't deserve it as well?
Can you see that your argument is completely and utterly flawed? This isn't happening…and even if we were to go along with you and assume it was it's likely to do be done to positive votes as well….and even if this was assumed to be correct, it's not a problem that people are complaining about…..and even if we assumed this was correct …it's not enforceable.
Bottomline - the current system works well, if you have an issue with people disagreeing with the way you view something maybe try the adult thing and put a logical fact based rebuttal of their point in the thread. Simple.
wow first time I've heard about this 'I agree' neg trend. Do you have some examples?
See example below
@Daniel Plainview: lots of good info in this post…..gone from view…..
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/431102
@Daniel Plainview: positive votes don't remove posts…. only shift it about in terms of popularity.
Neg votes remove posts….. and the all information in that post. There may be many posts that you have missed without even knowing it……
I like to make my own decisions about what posts I see, not have that removed by a crowd of neg happy clowns.
@swapsey: hahahahaha - are you just typing this stuff as you think it? Thats where if you wrote that in a test the teacher circles it in red ink and writes ,"NO! What does this mean???? See me after class) ;-)
A 'found it cheaper' button brilliant - maybe you should go and share that with the mods as I'm sure they'll want to jump all over that.
Any other buttons we should have instead of them simple positive, negative - thats evidently crippling OzB with it's horrendous inefficiency.
@Daniel Plainview: Haha there is one thing for certain, you will never please everybody but displease somebody 100% of the time
So are you saying this is really a big problem thats all over OzB at present? Isn't balance a good thing and people can make their own minds up rather than only being able to say 'positive' things/votes.
People can't make their own minds about a deal that's been neg voted into oblivion, because they'll never see it
Can you link an example? The only deals ever unlisted have been spam by store reps, and if you like you can change the settings so you see those deals.
@Savas: Which adds to the argument that says neg votes don't serve a purpose. We already can see spam for what it is.
@swapsey: The thing is people on a higher 'paygrade' to you (and me) disagree. And the site works very well with them in charge. Nuf said.
@Savas: I gave up worrying years ago…. Have a look, see if you can find any https://www.ozbargain.com.au/deals/negvoted
neg votes are not for spam deals…. they should be reported
No and balance has nothing to do with neg votes. How did you come up with those two topics (big problem and balance)?
Positive if you like, negative if you don't. Seems straight forward to me.
You're the one who proposed changing the current system, so I dunno call me crazy but I thought you'd have a number of examples of why this was necessary and I thought it must have been a pretty big problem if changing the system was required.
So it's not a big problem now? So does the system need to be changed or perhaps we'll just leave as is?
Ok then whats your point?
@Daniel Plainview: Some would say negativity breeds attention, just like "if it bleeds it leads" in the press (have you heard that saying?). That could be why the powers that be will never remove negs on deals.
Now that you bring up balance, I just realised that we could say negs are an imbalanced part of ozbargain. You see, it brings far more attention to have 1 single neg on a deal than 20 positive votes. That's too much power.
@swapsey: here's an example… https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/426993
1st neg vote…. useful….. it can be had cheaper elsewhere, and had links to cheaper version
5 'yeah me too' negs later, it's gone from the view of most users, so nobody benefits from any of the information in the post
@andy19363: Yeah I reckon the cheaper elsewhere thing needs to be stated explicity so it helps people. Seeing a red mark doesn't communicate why>?
@swapsey: Yes, I have heard that saying - thank you for sharing your wisdom with me. :-/
Here's another saying - as you seem the worldy, cerebral type - 'If it ain't broke don't fix it." Have you heard of that one? ;-)
So if a votes gets even a single neg it attracts a heap of attention and the OzB powers that be are super keen to jump on the back of this and as such they want all deals to get loads of neg votes…is that kinda what you're saying?
Honestly silliest thing I've heard this year. Sorry but thats crazy talk. Maybe you and the 'I found it cheaper' button guy need to form a group as between you two I'm sure you've some great ideas.
PS. Hahaha Oh YOU ARE the found it cheaper button guy! Oh well that explains it then. Nuf said.
The rot about neg votes set in around 2011, when they became much more powerful, in that they could remove deals from view.
Lots of good deals lost because of this. I haven't posted a deal since then.
As people have said previously, it used to warn people about bad deals/products/merchants, or highlight a better deal. The neg vote now serves no useful purpose.
The neg vote for comments also serves no useful purpose
The torrents of positive votes for mediocre religious deals are here to stay, so negs based on ethics is in my opinion within the same ballpark. Whether this is in the true spirit of ozbargain is another story however.
positive votes for mediocre religious deals
Exactly. We shouldn't be upvoting because the deal is affiliated with religious, moral or political alignment.
I'm far from religious but I only neg religious deals that are not actual bargains in futile hope that this site will not degenerate to feature "free brochures" as legitimate deals.
Getting the best bargains usually contradicts with saving the environment/animals/people. Getting really cheap stuff usually means that natural resources/animals/humans have been exploited or wasted to produce a lot of goods and services that people probably didn't really want or need in the first place.
As this is a bargain site then we should focus on that aspect.
Examples are the recent caged egg deals.
In this example I wouldn't down vote because of Ethics/Morals reasons, and I wouldn't up vote it either.
Its a great deal if you buy that product, if you don't then like all other deals that don't interest me, meh.
This should apply to all deals.
Always happens when cage eggs are on special.
I don't personally think it's justified, just comment without the neg.
I have chickens in the backyard myself.
Cage eggs are a thing, let people buy them without this constant judgement.
What about the iPhone deals and other Chinese made deals using cheap or exploited labour.
or thing with lithium battery that are made with exploited labour and devastating damage to environments?
Or do we only care some of the time or selective with our outrage?
Doesn't free speech allow us to be selective or hypocritical if we want to be?
People voice outrage because they like to think they are morally superior and want others to know they are. How many of the people that have commented about caged eggs have actively done something to stop it? I'd guess 0. But hey they left a comment about how horrific the conditions are for the chickens, so you know it's like they did something.
Yep, spot on, Cletus. Hence my commmets in that caged egg thread about all the fake outrage. Some people feel the need to be outraged about something.
Clicking the little red neg button and standing on their soap box gives them the endorphin rush they need to feel morally superior to everyone else without the actual act of doing anything physical about it.
I often get negged for speaking up about ethics.
Who cares about random neg votes from strangers on the internet anyway. Lol.
Soon there will be vegans that vote against every meat-related deal because of what they believe in.
Many people are vegans and vegetarians just to be trendy etc these days. And also because they believe it is healthier. Therefore it really isn't necessarily an ethic and morals thing .
But the caged eggs is. It's the same food whether caged or uncaged, so definitely an ethical and moral issue comes up there (or several). Not everyone can afford non-caged eggs though. I am doing alright now, but there have been times when I have been completely skint. I would'nt force those that can't afford non-caged eggs, to starve because the are too poor to afford the alternative. That would not be right ethically/morally IMO.
Many people are vegans and vegetarians just to be trendy etc these days. And also because they believe it is healthier. Therefore it really isn't necessarily an ethic and morals thing .
Except when it's trendy etc to pretend to have those ethics and morals so you can feel morally superior to others while also using sweatshop sneakers and phones.
Speaking of generalisations. Somebody want to give me some statistics on "many". I really would like you to cite those URL sites.
You guys want to tell me where your "line in the sand" is? I'm neither vegan, nor vegetarian but I do try to look for the ethical options for my food production.
So, pray, do you guys buy sweatshop sneakers and phones? Please provide us with your ethical alternatives; or are you just mouthing off.
So, pray, do you guys buy sweatshop sneakers and phones?
I absolutely do. But I don't complain about cage eggs, or one use plastics, or any of that kinda bs.
Go look in the cage egg deal thread for people who negged it. You'll find most if not all of them have upvoted sweatshop labour deals. Here's an example:
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/432752?page=2#comment-6856…
And voted on:
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/user/20997/voted
Free 7-Eleven Banana Bread via 7-Eleven Fuel App new
7-Eleven, well known for exploiting and underpaying workers.
iPhone 8, Pixel 3, Samsung S9 $59, iPhone X $79, Huawei Mate 20 Pro $74 @ Optus (24m Contract)
I think all made with sweatshop labour, including from factories with suicide nets.
@HighAndDry: So rather than trying to make any difference to anyone or any species you are happy to do nothing, ensuring everyone/everything is screwed over. Yup, that is Neocon thinking for you. As long as I’m alright who gives a rats about anyone else. Funnily enough we can’t fix all the worlds problems in one hit but using ”whataboutisms” will guarantee you do nothing.
Yup, that is Neocon thinking for you. As long as I’m alright who gives a rats about anyone else.
I'm not even sure "neocon" is a valid political orientation in Australia's political landscape. I'd classify myself as centre-left if anything, with a dash of libertarianism (and that's in turn mediated by my understanding that practical considerations mean some regulation is required at a minimum).
In any case, no, that's not my philosophy. My priority is on pragmatism and actually achieving results, instead of moral grandstanding and posturing that makes you feel good, but does sht-all. You might have noticed that I'm not using whataboutism to reject their argument, in fact I'm not addressing their argument at all. I'm just calling out their hypocrisy - to underline *my argument that these people are only doing it for moral one-upmanship, and not actually out of principle.
I actually outlined my views elsewhere, but here they are again: I don't think that individual action, even organised individual action, will make a jot of difference. Because Australia has about the same population as one city (being Shanghai) in China. The developing world will dictate what happens to our planet, and no amount of moral superiority on part of the developed world will change that. In fact, if you hadn't noticed, most people - yes including the developing world - do not like being condescended to or generally told what to do.
So if you ask me, people like yourself, like those activist vegans and anti-cage-egg people in those deal threads, will have a net negative effect on the planet. They just get pat themselves on the back while doing it.
while also using sweatshop sneakers and phones.
So what phone do you use ?
I suppose you also have your sneakers hand made, sourced locally, ethically produced.
There is no choice, but to purchase "sweatshop" products from countries that pay their workers next to nothing. Unless you build phone yourself completely from scratch (because all the chips etc inside are almost certainly from very poorly paid labor)
It's like a soap opera around here
OzBargain is the real life Summer Bay…
Speaking of which… hey scotty April Fools? ;)
I'm going to neg cheap deals out of ethics because it is making life harder for retailers and that makes me sad.
I'm going to neg TVs because they may be used for broadcasting propaganda.
I'm going to neg all deals by non-vegans.
I'm going to neg all deals because reasons.
Bargains can exist entirely independant of ethics. Let's keep it that way. Don't like a genuine bargain because it conflicts with your morals, don't buy it. Simples.
I'm going to neg cheap deals out of ethics because it is making life harder for retailers and that makes me sad.
Exactly. I'm going to neg all deals because it cuts into the bottom line for retailers and how much they can afford to pay minimum wage workers.
if I notice something like vegans down voting something I make a point of being more open to buying it.
Has anyone here ever been to a chicken farm? If so you might note that chickens are possibly the stupidest cruelest animal on earth. If they hear a loud noice they run to the other side of the pen and climb on top of each other clawing their friends family etc. basically what ever is in their way. It kind of looks like a zombie apocalypse and they are climbing a wall to get to something like that movie z. Nature in general is pretty brutal (penguins peck each other’s eyes out in a battle to the death, bower birds trash their friends and enemies houses, birds push their young out of the nest to fly ending in slow broken bone death many times). So don’t kid yourself that animals are pure and cute
With saying that generally I find people don’t research or actually think before downvoting others
So you justify out cruelty because of the actions of, appropriately, named bird brains. We do things that are worse and we, actually, know better. Speaking of not thinking.
I’m just saying animals are very different to the picture people paint of them. How do you know a chicken doesn’t like a cage? Did they tell you? Considering how skittish they are it’s quite likely they prefer a protected cage than an open yard where they can be attacked but anyway we can settle it go record an interview with a chicken and get back to me
welcome to ozbargain
Welcome to the internet.