Jump to content

Promoting the Use of Negative Votes.


Recommended Posts

The negative vote doesn't look nice at first glance. It's in red text that contrasts the black and blue background, looks longer than your typical positive vote, and literally says "DENIED" in all caps. Negative votes get a lot of flak from members in the community because they seem to discourage people. The size of them compared to positive votes gives off the impression that someone feels very strongly about another member not passing. But this is not the purpose of negative voting. The actual purpose is to offer a platform for any member to voice concerns and offer constructive criticism to allow a person to grow. 

 

Constructive criticism is important for a members growth as it gives the member a valid, non-hostile reason (or two) as to what they could be doing better as a person. Recently on PureSkooma's and JuJu's promotions, people weighed in and had different reasons for each person as to why they think that person shouldn't get a promotion. Oftentimes, the criticism was wrapped in a "compliment sandwich", mentioning at the beginning and end of a person's statement the merits of what they've done for the community, but contrasting that in the middle with criticism that the person can work towards. Granted, that criticism isn't always presented like that, along with heavy vote weights a comment can appear hostile, but ultimately the negative vote serves as a revealing of one's hand. Their comments represents an openness of opinion that anyone can read from, and we should be promoting an open and understanding environment.

 

We need to stomp out this idea that putting down a negative vote is "childish" or "petty". These people don't want to put a neg vote but they do because they want to see the member succeed. Someone may feel hurt that one of their favorite members or their best bud is getting negative votes, but that person who voted probably is friends with them too. So what do we do? I suggest that we treat promotions like evaluations of a member, just like General Evals. They don't have to be that in detail, but we should be actively weighing the merits and flaws of a member, especially within the Officer/Senior Officer ranks. This would need to be a community-wide effort to change the current mentality, which is why I've posted here in the General Clan Discussion board. Division Leaders and Officers, I recommend you talk about this subject with your own members. 

 

Hopefully we can change the narrative on the negative vote and view it as a more positive aspect of our promotion system. We are a meritocracy, after all.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The comments regarding negative votes being petty, childish, immature, a deliberate attempt to block a promotion (implying nefarious reasons)... being the person that prompted this with my own negative vote, I feel it epitomizes exactly why people are so reluctant to use the negative voting tool. I have valid reasons for my neg vote - just as I have had valid positive reasons for all the positive support on promotions in the past. A less confident member would be refraining from using the negative votes - or even avoid voting altogether - to avoid this "conflict". 

 

More to the point, opinions are being dismissed as wrong and belittled because other people disagree with their opinions. Something that needs to be closely watched. 

 

Anything that can encourage people to make a better use of the tools available to them is gonna get a +1 from me.

  • Clap 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really want to beat a horse to death on the topic. I've said my piece and then some on another topic and I'll partially quote/paraphrase myself on my stance for what's relevant here.

 

All negative votes on either of the promotions Skooma/JuJu were crafted and supported with Constructive criticism. But that's also not the point. These opinions are based on careful gathering of information. None of these votes were done to slander either member and to simply keep them from Officer/Sr Officer. We voted they way we did because we thought they were not ready to make the next step based on the information we found and not meeting expectations for the rank they were being promoted to.

I don't want anyone to paint a picture here as if anyone is out to get anyone. That's not what Neg voting is and should ever be used for. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

       I could go on about why neg votes are useful like I have done before, but I am going to take a new perspective. The big reason I think these neg votes tend to hit hard is the fact many are getting nothing but positive votes at the speed of Type's "45 kmph" only to slam into this wall with little warning for everyone. Even when I am not up for promotion and ask about peoples views on me it can be of a shock when there is something they think you need to improve on.

 

      I want to make a suggestion of having some sort of "files" on officers, and potentials, and those who might or might not get evals. This could be updated quarterly or as needed by multiple members of Sr. Leadership to ensure it will be fair and unbiased. This will give many of us a opportunity to check on our own growth and if we have questions we can go forward to those appropriate or it can be made anonymous on peoples names if it needs or should be. I believe with a system like this it would lessen the blow of neg votes as "coming out of nowhere" and help bring us to a better understanding. 

Edited by LightningWolves(OD)
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LightningWolves(OD) said:

    I could go on about why neg votes are useful like I have done before, but I am going to take a new perspective. The big reason I think these neg votes tend to hit hard is the fact many are getting nothing but positive votes at the speed of Type's "45 kmph" only to slam into this wall with little warning for everyone. Even when I am not up for promotion and ask about peoples views on me it can be of a shock when there is something they think you need to improve on.

 

  I want to make a suggestion of having some sort of "files" on officers, and potentials, and those who might or might not get evals. This could be updated quarterly or as needed by multiple members of Sr. Leadership to ensure it will be fair and unbiased. This will give many of us a opportunity to check on our own growth and if we have questions we can go forward to those appropriate or it can be made anonymous on peoples names if it needs or should be. I believe with a system like this it would lessen the blow of neg votes as "coming out of nowhere" and help bring us to a better understanding. 

 

Personally I disagree with keeping a "file" on these members. Members who are voting on one another need to do their research and make sure they are voting wisely. Asking the Admin team to maintain a living document that continues to grow for each members is asking way to much in my opinion. 

All of the information that members vote with is available for people to find if they're looking for it. It's just a matter of Commanders, Generals and all Officers etc... putting in the legwork to gather that information to make sure they're voting with an informed opinion. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JD(OD) said:

 

Personally I disagree with keeping a "file" on these members. Members who are voting on one another need to do their research and make sure they are voting wisely. Asking the Admin team to maintain a living document that continues to grow for each members is asking way to much in my opinion. 

All of the information that members vote with is available for people to find if they're looking for it. It's just a matter of Commanders, Generals and all Officers etc... putting in the legwork to gather that information to make sure they're voting with an informed opinion. 

 

 

Also it could cause privacy concerns

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JD(OD) said:

 

Personally I disagree with keeping a "file" on these members. Members who are voting on one another need to do their research and make sure they are voting wisely. Asking the Admin team to maintain a living document that continues to grow for each members is asking way to much in my opinion. 

All of the information that members vote with is available for people to find if they're looking for it. It's just a matter of Commanders, Generals and all Officers etc... putting in the legwork to gather that information to make sure they're voting with an informed opinion. 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, SalinePandora(OD) said:

Also it could cause privacy concerns

   Both of you are fair on your thoughts. 

 

  I knew it would be a bit of a stretch on that proposal. From my perspective most of the arguments fall under emotions of getting a neg vote. We talk about that alot already and I was thinking of ways of potentially lessing that emotional disappointment (for a nicer term) of getting a neg vote. After all neg votes is a useful tool for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Geordie(OD) said:

A less confident member would be refraining from using the negative votes - or even avoid voting altogether - to avoid this "conflict". 

 

I don't think of myself as a "less confident" member by choosing to use my neutral vote instead of a negative vote.  That's my personal choice just as your use of negative voting.  I have, as JD well knows, and many others, been very vocal in my stance on negative voting.

 

The biggest issue I have at present is with many of the current officers who chime in on on recent posts here on the forum, but don't even take the time to vote for officer and/or general promotions.  It's not how a person votes, but the fact that they take the time to vote.  

 

We are all adults here.  Our opinions are formed by many aspects in our real life, our education, and our interactions with people.  That being said, I have never been shy about expressing my opinion and my console use speaks for itself, because I do take the time to vote on members that I have interacted whether they are in D2 or not.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I just have a side opinion. I don't think every time someone negative votes there needs to be a forum slap fight. I just don't see the point or need. I would suggest we take these concerns into the next admin meeting and have it fully done and put to bed.

Edited by SalinePandora(OD)
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Someone may feel hurt that one of their favorite members or their best bud is getting negative votes, but that person who voted probably is friends with them too."

 

5050 on that one, everything else look bout right. Shit a chunk of the people who hit me never even talked to me, literally. Blind was a exception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If all it took to get people to accept criticism was changing the font and color of text then the world would be a much more peaceful and unified place.

People aren't generally that understanding, though. More often people will take things personally regardless. You can try and change the mentality towards neg voting, and in the case of a few people you may even succeed, but no amount of effort will ever prevent a lot of people and their friends from taking it personally anyway. It's not an issue with the mentality within the Clan, it's an issue with the mentality within the human race. In general people just aren't that open-minded. It might seem like the evaluations work better in that regard, but it only seems that way because it takes place on the forum, where there aren't as many impulsive people who participate. Even then, you only have to look as far back as Triny's eval in January to see that people will lash out hard against those whose votes they don't like, even in evals, no matter how well you try to explain your reasoning behind it.

 

You can't teach someone to be more mature, you have to wait for them to reach it on their own. As leaders, mentors, and friends, we have two options before us. We can take the easy road, or the hard road. If its the easy road you want then you may choose to only support people, tell them what they want to hear, avoid confrontation and just be everyone's buddy. You won't do much to help people grow, and your fellow leaders won't respect and admire you as much as they otherwise could, but people will love you, far fewer people will say bad things about you, and you can feel nice and secure about yourself. It is a *safe* approach, avoiding risks in favor of being on everyone's good side.

Or you can take the hard road. Tell people what you think they need to hear, instead of what they may want to hear. Make the decisions you feel are necessary, even if they aren't always popular. And stay true to your own belief of what a leader should be. There will be people who hate you for it, there'll be people who will talk behind your back, create conspiracy stories, hold grudges, and may even hit you with neg votes and raw messages of their own as payback. If you are going to choose this road then these are realities that you will need to accept, not everyone is interested in understanding you or your reasons. But those of your peers who recognize what you are doing will respect you more for it, you are more likely to be seen as a person of integrity, and every once and a while one of those people you critique will actually think about what you said and learn from it, even if they don't admit it right away. And then they will become a better person, perhaps even a leader themselves one day. The rest won't, and will remain spiteful to you.

 

As the leading expert on saying things people don't like, my recommendation is this: Just be the kind of leader you think you should be, and make the decisions you feel are right. Pick which people whose opinions matter to you, and let them be the ones whose views you consider and take to heart. Don't worry about the opinions of everyone outside of that list, let them say what they want, and believe what they want. Some of them will learn, some of them will not, that is the way of things. If you are lucky then you'll find an opportunity to explain your choices in more detail, and if you are really lucky then some of the people you explain yourself to might even reconsider how they feel about your views. But I wouldn't try and make everyone understand, you will find that the harder you try and convince them all, the harder some will reject it and push back.

 

That is the price of integrity. That is what it takes to help people grow sometimes. It's not an easy road to walk, it's a thankless task with as many disappointments as successes. But personally I think it's worth it. It's not only important for helping some people grow, but it also means staying true to yourself as well. It is necessary for a good leader, mentor, or friend to say the things that need to be said, even if the receiver may not understand or appreciate it. They may not grow if you do say it, but they won't grow if you don't.

 

In my opinion, a leader that is loved by everyone isn't doing their job as a leader.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1
  • Clap 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well look at that, juju been taking the hard road. Though easy road based on description sounds easy, its actually very very hard.. Id rather just go ham and accept fate, not lie to survive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was writing this paper here when the website told me to get F'd and that it was either To long I took, or someone deleted my shizzz.. My first thought was DELETION. I was wrong so I still wanted to post this.

 

"You can't teach someone to be more like you, you have to wait for them to BE YOU."

 

Fixed that one. [Drum tap]

 

"If its the easy road you want then you may choose to only support people, tell them what they want to hear, avoid confrontation and just be everyone's buddy. You won't do much to help people grow, and your fellow leaders won't respect and admire you as much as they otherwise could, but people will love you, far fewer people will say bad things about you, and you can feel nice and secure about yourself. It is a *safe* approach, avoiding risks in favor of being on everyone's good side."

 

This not only sounds horrible, it sounds like we creating fake people. Calling this the "safe" approach is false flagging. These type of people can stay farrrrrr away from me.[They already do for the most part]

 

"As the leading expert on saying things people don't like, my recommendation is this: Just be the kind of leader you think you should be, and make the decisions you feel are right. Pick which people whose opinions matter to you, and let them be the ones whose views you consider and take to heart. Don't worry about the opinions of everyone outside of that list, let them say what they want, and believe what they want."

 

This is the beginnings of group forming, I agree with the words which is probably why this is a bad idea. Unless of course, your group is 5 people in the DUBS then do you buddy get that rank!

 

"That is the price of integrity"

 

Only the price if you take the hard road, aint no pitty for the easy route city! Sugar coating isn't having Integrity/ thats being a Skeezer

 

"It's not only important for helping some people grow, but it also means staying true to yourself as well"

 

If they dont got integrity, they aint staying true to anything but their/the goal.

 

"In my opinion, a leader that is loved by everyone isn't doing their job as a leader."

 

While stated as a opinion, it is actually FACT.

 

I overall agree with a chunk of what terra said, but been called a CRIMINAL FOR IT. I shall have PMs open for all the apologies and love that will be flowing in. Im getting into these convos more whether my shit makes sense or not, someone will get something from it. Maybe my apple taste different on this sunnyside of the tree!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JuJu(OD) said:

Well look at that, juju been taking the hard road. Though easy road based on description sounds easy, its actually very very hard.. Id rather just go ham and accept fate, not lie to survive.

Yet you're critical of the people "taking the hard route" and negative voting because they see something that they think needs improvement?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Geordie(OD) said:

Yet you're critical of the people "taking the hard route" and negative voting because they see something that they think needs improvement?

Im all for negative voting, I think you got me confused with someone else buddy. Well documented Im totally for it, just not the gangbangin neg votes of a paticular group that you can CLEARLY see/call out. There be a reason behind why more people are talking out. This isn't some made up shiz, it only sounds made up if you IN IT. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JuJu(OD) said:

Im all for negative voting, I think you got me confused with someone else buddy. Well documented Im totally for it, just not the gangbangin neg votes of a paticular group that you can CLEARLY see/call out. There be a reason behind why more people are talking out. This isn't some made up shiz, it only sounds made up if you IN IT. 

So enlighten me - being one of the negative voters, what information do you have on my own voting choices that makes you think that I have no valid reasons and am just ganging up?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Geordie I will not enlighten you as 1. Terra words I can choose who I want to share my personal info with[I only share with those I BOLIEVE in]/ 2. Not quite sure who you are so not sure I can confine/trust in you based on word of the wind. Ty for your time and hope to game with you soon 🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JuJu(OD) said:

Geordie I will not enlighten you as 1. Terra words I can choose who I want to share my personal info with[I only share with those I BOLIEVE in]/ 2. Not quite sure who you are so not sure I can confine/trust in you based on word of the wind. Ty for your time and hope to game with you soon 🙂


So let me see if I have this in order...

In previous events, you make a very clear point that people should be dealing with their complaints of another person, but now won't actually deal with your complaint about my voting.

 

You comment on a vote stating clearly that the negative voting is "illegitimate, what kind of gangbangin is goin on here? This one is super petty. actually, especially if my info is right." Yet when I offer you an opportunity to clarify whether your info is right, you shy away from it. 

You try to call me out, calling my (and others) neg votes petty, claiming you have info why I really voted and how it was some big conspiracy - yet now won't back it up and share this truth, claiming you aren't sure who I am - despite it literally being about me.

 

You claim you're all for neg voting, but as soon as it's done to someone you like, it's all fake and there's some reason why a group of people are doing it?

 

You claim to have info why my vote was false, to have the real info - but when asked to prove it, no, that's personal, I'm not confiding in you.

Sorry but no, you don't get to insult me, imply I am conspiring against other members and have secret ganging-up level reasons for neg voting someone... then turn around act act nice. 

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Geordie(OD) said:


So let me see if I have this in order...

In previous events, you make a very clear point that people should be dealing with their complaints of another person, but now won't actually deal with your complaint about my voting.

 

You comment on a vote stating clearly that the negative voting is "illegitimate, what kind of gangbangin is goin on here? This one is super petty. actually, especially if my info is right." Yet when I offer you an opportunity to clarify whether your info is right, you shy away from it. 

You try to call me out, calling my (and others) neg votes petty, claiming you have info why I really voted and how it was some big conspiracy - yet now won't back it up and share this truth, claiming you aren't sure who I am - despite it literally being about me.

 

You claim you're all for neg voting, but as soon as it's done to someone you like, it's all fake and there's some reason why a group of people are doing it?

 

You claim to have info why my vote was false, to have the real info - but when asked to prove it, no, that's personal, I'm not confiding in you.

Sorry but no, you don't get to insult me, imply I am conspiring against other members and have secret ganging-up level reasons for neg voting someone... then turn around act act nice. 

 

Geordie I dont shy from it at all, your in a position to me that doesnt matter. No need to feed you info other then YOU saying you want it, if that was the case Id have to feed 30 other people to. Thing is I just go to the sources.. You aint there yet broloc sorry. Unfort I gotta dissapear I can already here the PMs. thanks again!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JuJu(OD) said:

 

Geordie I dont shy from it at all, your in a position to me that doesnt matter. No need to feed you info other then YOU saying you want it, if that was the case Id have to feed 30 other people to. Thing is I just go to the sources.. You aint there yet broloc sorry. Unfort I gotta dissapear I can already here the PMs. thanks again!

 

And there's the problem in your logic. You have the source of the vote sat, right here, wanting to have this all in the open. But no, you want to stick to your other sources. 

 

I don't want the info - what I want is for you to realise that my vote is mine. My own. I made my decisions for it, as I have on every other vote I've cast, as did everyone else. Stop spreading this "real info" crap and stop belittling others because you disagree with them. 

 

You wanna continue otherwise? Go for it - but don't expect me to sit and take your crap when you insult me. 

 

You're the one who takes the stance that people should be backing up their stances, should be going to the people they have issues with before they start mouthing off. Take some of your own advice and deal with it. 

 

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Geordie(OD) said:

 

And there's the problem in your logic. You have the source of the vote sat, right here, wanting to have this all in the open. But no, you want to stick to your other sources. 

 

I don't want the info - what I want is for you to realise that my vote is mine. My own. I made my decisions for it, as I have on every other vote I've cast, as did everyone else. Stop spreading this "real info" crap and stop belittling others because you disagree with them. 

 

You wanna continue otherwise? Go for it - but don't expect me to sit and take your crap when you insult me. 

 

You're the one who takes the stance that people should be backing up their stances, should be going to the people they have issues with before they start mouthing off. Take some of your own advice and deal with it. 

 

 

Im glad your vote is yours Geordie, that makes me super happy and proud. It shows that you are a pillar of your own strength! That is what OD was ment and built for. *Stands up and starts to clap* I am dealing with it just where it MATTERS. I dont think your grasping that part to well. You wanna be in but you aint 😞 Ill let you get the last one in because I think you need it! ADIOS AMIGOS

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think people are wrong, then you have to explain why you think you are right. If you can't explain why you are right, then no one is going to take you seriously. Geordie isn't going to change his approach just because you tell him to.

 

I won't pretend like there hasn't been cases of people grouping up to neg vote someone in the past, but it's also possible for multiple people to independently notice the same issue with someone. Especially if there was a specific incident that multiple people witnessed, which it sounds like there was in this case. I don't think this is a case of people conspiring to neg vote PureSkooma, I don't think PureSkooma is disliked enough for that to happen. On the contrary, most people think pretty highly of him and what he has done, including those that neg voted him. In cases of groups ganging up to neg vote someone there is usually a history of bad blood between the group and the individual up for promotion. You don't really see that here.

 

You could argue that people are holding that one incident during the drunken sea of thieves night against PureSkooma, and in truth you may very well be right. You may or may not think that is fair, but it isn't unusual. Sometimes one bad call can blow our chances for the next promotion, particularly if it is still fresh in everyone's minds. It happens a lot. But in those cases we just have to swallow our loss, and remember that we'll have another chance at it again sometime.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Neg voting serves a purpose. But I think just as plainly as one can read a comment they can plainly read when the person neg voting is being a bit ridiculous with the weight they throw behind it. Especially if you are aware of the situation(s) that are mentioned in the vote. When the positive work someone does is outweighed by a lapse in judgement, misunderstanding or because you just don't like someone it is apparent to the majority. In most of these situations its clear that the person is more than likely going to pass even with the neg votes. Take Skooma's promo for example.

 

So be it petty .. be it factual majority usually ALWAYS wins. Unless we can propose a better system for neg voting that once again the majority can agree on then like JD said we are beating a dead horse. Its just like politics if you don't like it then get out and vote. 🙃

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m a little disappointed that more Warrant Officers didn’t jump in to give their piece. Makes me wonder of the actual importance of the issue.

 

I think after this we should focus on making more localized efforts to change current friction on negative votes. Anything that needs to be said has probably been said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Zakspeeeed(OD) said:

I’m a little disappointed that more Warrant Officers didn’t jump in to give their piece. Makes me wonder of the actual importance of the issue.

 

I think after this we should focus on making more localized efforts to change current friction on negative votes. Anything that needs to be said has probably been said.

I agree.

 

I wonder if we even change the amount you can put towards neg votes if it could possibly change the narrative of "oh they are throwing their entire weight behind something to stop my friend from getting a well deserved promotion." to the true intention of providing direct feedback.  

 

If we give people the amount of -1 for example. They can still provide feedback.  But like mentioned previously if majority doesn't think you should get promoted you will have enough -1 that you won't pass. However in the case for Officer promotions where you already need quite a few more votes than standard someone dropping a -10 or -20 from 1 person in the current state can completely change the course of someone's promotion and with said changes would need majority. 

 

Lets say someone is up for promotion to colonel, captain or major thats 25-50 votes if someone drops a -15 or -20 and you are in any division other than D2 you are EXTREMELY unlikely to pass given majority of  divisions do not have over 20 members. In the past when we had more robust divisions the system was more fitting but given our dwindling member base we could consider changing it with the times. 🙂 

Edited by Dabomb(OD)
updated
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...