Hi,
I just received an email from Dell, I think this monitor is one of the popular deal before. Maybe it is worth while for someone who are trying to find a great monitor.
Cheers
…I think this monitor is one of the popular deal before
Infamous is a more adequate term.
Not only is it this price every other week, but others report you can get it for $279 any time, merely by asking customer service.
Another free monthly ads for Dell by another OP on Ozbargain
not your fault op, but this isnt a valid deal on ozb anymore.. its on sale too often to even be considered a deal..
I am negging in a hope that dell sees this and knows we are fed up with their "$279 special"
You do realise the more negs a post gets, the less likely it is to be seen by anyone?
The neg vote is there to remove deals from view….
Similar sentiments to others… not a deal.
16:10 = no good
?????
So…16:10 is better for games.
If ya want 16:9 - buy a junky cheap benq.
I dont see why all the negs on my comment, 16:10 isnt the best option for games
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v472/ivanjmg/Foros%20y%20t…
this isn't really a gaming monitor
P.S sorry about the neg on your record andz88, has to be done!
… i don't need to say anything right… lol
neither do we vote removed. LOL
Please dont. We did instigate the rule, for a reason.
Voting isnt a popularity contest when it comes to negative voting. It has major impacts and if not used wisely it detracts from its intended use.
Using it wisely helps the community more.
If you dont like Dell bargains and I have to agree with you there, then just filter them out.
Thanks
it could be argued that positive voting also has major impacts, and therefore you should impose a similar "comment before you vote" rule…
just have to disagree with you with your last point. Filtering out bad deals does not help the community, but negative voting at least provokes thoughtful discussion. Consequently I think that jbk's negs are actually constructive for the community.
$0.02
but negative voting at least provokes thoughtful discussion. Consequently I think that jbk's negs are actually constructive for the community.
I disagree; in fact his original comment is quite contrary to your point on thoughtful discussion. "i don't need to say anything right" smacks of laziness and a 'me too' attitude. Neither of these things are thoughtful, nor do they help anyone. For example: imagine if he were to post that on a different thread, say the popular surge board deal on DSE, and neg, without rhyme nor reason. His negative vote would be removed very quickly. In a different context, his comment would not be received well, but since he is siding with the prevailing opinion in this one, it's alright?
In order for thoughtful discussion to be provoked, it has to begin with an actual subject, which jbk did not feel the need to include. That's why people are required to post their reasons for negging. Whether the reason for the neg is apparent in the thread or not, you have to be able to validate your vote with reasons, otherwise the whole system is worthless. Therefore, I think votes like jbk's are not constructive for the community, but negative voting, as described in the rules and guidelines, is.
jbk's comment and vote would seem to be a typical example of the OzBargain neg sheep; people are so ready to neg, either comments or posts, but are rarely so ready to explain why.
Revacious - what you say may or may not be correct (its an opinion).
Point is that negative voting is set up in a certain way. Hang what it is I'll do what I like, may indicate a very independent thought and a right of free speech etc etc, but
This is a sharing community, and if we share in ways that others understand, it makes it more effective.
Now if you want to change how negative votes are used, or positive for that matter, take it up in the forums, there are a few existing threads.
But as it stands this is the guidelines. PD explains this quite well. Get community agreement to change it, that way its not confusing.
Comments are very welcome, and well commented negative votes are also. The rest PD has already clearly enunciated
negative voting at least provokes thoughtful discussion.
Neg voting actually stifles discussion, as the deal gets removed from most people's view after a relatively small number of neg votes…… A couple of 'ditto' and 'me too' negs will make it disappear fairly quickly.
Therefore, I think votes like jbk's are not constructive for the community, but negative voting, as described in the rules and guidelines, is.
Unfortunately, so many are unaware/choose to ignore the guidelines that…. as you say….
otherwise the whole system is worthless.
Sometimes a reason does not need to be said 100 times. Like the DSE deal that had well over 200 negs. Mods then removed over a hundred because people said along the lines of "I agree with all the other negs".
If its obvious does it really need to be said evevy single neg?
@PD, The point I was trying to make in my comment was that negative voting is preferable to just filtering them out, as ozpete suggested.
We could discuss the semantics of the negative vote, but I'm sure you will agree that it could be best summed up as "I don't like this deal". This is the "actual subject" which provokes discussion; we discuss why a particular person dislikes the deal, which will encompasses their reasons. Obviously if they included their reasons beforehand, it would make things easier which is why it is understandable that the "comment before neg" rule is in place, but like I mentioned before, I'm not arguing that this is a bad rule. I'm arguing that negging the deal is of more use to the community than hiding it altogether, as negging at least has the potential to stimulate thoughtful discussion.
@andy, as far as I'm aware, negative voting has no role in whether or not a deal is visible to the community, only positive votes have the power to bring something to the front page. The Dick Smith deal was still on the front page, despite having 200-odd negative votes. Consequently I think your point is moot.
Anyways, this is off topic; if anything else needs to be said, I suppose the forums is the place to go.
as far as I'm aware, negative voting has no role in whether or not a deal is visible to the community,
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/wiki/help:voting_guidelines
Many people dont like a deal, and want others to know about some issues they have with the deal, as evidenced by the comments made about a deal when they negatively vote. The IRONY for you to consider is that if a deal gets a number of negative votes, it is removed from most visitors screens. So your considered comments go as well.
IF a poster gets more than two negative votes the system, locks them out of posting again for 5 days.
Also….
I'm arguing that negging the deal is of more use to the community than hiding it altogether,
It amounts to the same thing…. that is what the neg vote is there for
Are you sure we are on the same page with respect to "filtering them out?"
Filtering only makes the deals not appear to you, and would be useful if you were not interested in deals from a particular category/vendor. Negging serves a completely different purpose. Consequently I don't understand how you could possibly consider negging as equivalent to filtering deals. One is voicing your concerns over the legitimacy of a deal, and the other is akin to putting your head in the sand.
Consequently I don't understand how you could possibly consider negging as equivalent to filtering deals.
The neg vote is designed for the community to remove poor deals from view… a small number of negs and few/no positives will mean it is removed from view… whether you have voiced your concerns or not…
It is not currently a good system…. warnings and useful concerns get removed by the "me too" neg mobs, and decent deals get removed by the "I don't like this" neggers.
Example here….
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/87049
In essence the negative vote is a warning. A warning about being a scam, spam, defective product or a better deal exists already. It is not for saying that the price doesn't match some preconceived idea of what a bargain is in terms of percentage off.
None of the neg votes in this deal inform me of any of the above… none provide cheaper alternatives….
This deal was killed in less than two hours…
Good deal?….. I don't know…. not my cup of tea…. but people should be able to decide for themselves before a few neg happy members decide they don't like it and impose their thoughts on others
It's like you don't even read my posts, and the logic I use to drive a point across. Anyways, I'm done here, start a forum topic if you wish to continue.
Are you sure we are on the same page with respect to "filtering them out?"
I'm not sure we are…. filtering is a choice made by individual users on what deals they see and from what retailer.
If a post is negged enough, it will disappear, irrespective of any filtering applied by an individual.
I can understand why my Neg was revoked for not offering my opinion, but I have gotten sick of saying the same thing over and over again.. which is why I said I'd have a standard paragraph I could just copy and paste into the weekly Dell "bargains" we see over and over and over and over again..
Yes I could filter them out, but what happens when I actually do miss a GENUINE Dell bargain?!
I think there may be some truth to what mgowen said in reply to my assumption is the previous Dell post:
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/1136795?redirect=1
There is perhaps a big enough combination of Dell reps (both declared/undeclared) and clueless users who just keep posting Dell sale prices, and also such that they were able to neg my comment to remove my neg on the OP.
However, it may have now gotten to the stage where the community now realises how ridiculous it was getting because as shown on this deal there are not as many positive votes as the case would have been previously. But that is only because some are willing to take a stand and use the Big Red Neg!!
What I would be quite interested in is going back through all the old deals and looking at who the common positive voters were on Dell posts. I'm pretty sure there'd be some who could be seen from their comments to be not that clueless, and thus knew that they would be upvoting in Dell's interests.
Hopefully now anyway perhaps the Ozbargain community (including Dell reps and aficionados) has gotten the idea that it's kind of stupid to keep posting the same price every couple of weeks because they will get negs.
Maybe we could just have a Dell sticky in place? Give the Dell reps the permissions to turn the sticky on and off whenever they turn their "sale" price on and off? ;p
Yawn. It's been at this $279 price each "sale" for the past 1.5 years or so. If Dell could drop the price more I'd gladly buy another!