Simple fix. Just let the moderators moderate them.

while you are it: make it so random anonymous votes are being added on each reload

are you volunteering to do it? how much time are you planning to spend on it per day?

So what about last-comment-only editing?

I know a few have discussed this before and I've always wondered why is there both comments and forum threads. Delete the ability to post comments on the entries. Move all discussion to one place - the forums.

I generally don't like the idea of disabling features to avoid abuse.

Rate comments? Seriously? That's a dangerous weapon in the hands of a^HtheWizard ;)

the voting system on CSDb works way more than fine.

the fundamental problem is that people mistake votes as a tool to determine the quality of their productions. and that their importance is blown largely out of proportion.

and they blame the anonymous zealots for it, which by itself indeed makes a huge part of the problem.

some cant even react on an opinion different to theirs without resorting to severe FUCKFUCKFUCKYO!

it's the majority of the users.

If voting isn't a tool to determine the quality of a production, then please tell me what is its function?

Aren't the charts important enough so that almost every single person makes a question of prestige to be on the Top 10 on any of the lists?

Lack of respect to other people's opinion gives birth to contempt and impatience.

wrong. its a vocal minority, no more no less. the majority is fine with it and/or doesnt give a damn.

voting generally is an aggregator of opinion, not fact.

apparently that is true for a minority who thinks votes matter a lot to them, yes.

most people don't even vote at all.

lack of respect to other people's opinion is what spawns this useless voting discussion all the time, correct.

Should I remind you once again that the majority once voted against the anonymous voting system?

You really want a list the names of those sceners who expressed their aversion towards the anonymous voting during the time?

Once again, apparently true for those who actually create something apart from pulling data from left to right in the database and browse the releases.

An anonymous downvote without a single line of explanation is an opinion one should respect since when, and why?

except there never was such poll.

yes. i expect a list of at least 700 csdb users (that'd not be the majority right now, but i'd accept it)

"A site dedicated to gathering as much information as possible about the productions, the groups, the sceners, the events and bbs's in the Commodore 64 scene."
note how it doesnt say "massaging the ego of misunderstood artists who actually still create something for the c64 in 2013" - go facebook if thats what you expect.

what you call downvote is simply a matter of opinion. in this case the opinion is "i dont like it". and people dont have to explain their opinion or taste if they dont want to. its their legitimate right to think "it sucks" and vote accordingly, even if you think its the best thing since sliced bread. and yes, you have to accept it. if you cant - your problem.

So there are 700 active C64 sceners right now? Those who contribute to the last few years' scene activity and whose works are actually judged and affected by the votes?

Sceners use it as their main communication platform, not just for gathering and distributing raw data.

CSDb is the place where I'd like to show my works to people who think alike and share my passion towards the C64.

I had first hand experience where someone used the voting system for a personal vendetta

wat? before you babble about "majority" next time, please define accurately what you mean, and tell a number. how many are your so called "majority" then?

wait wat? sceners use csdb for communication more than irc or facebook? lol. what was the word again... delusional?

last time i checked the forum was almost dead any other half scene related forum i have visited in the past months is much much MUCH more active. and the most active part of the forum here is the part that is about the db.

i'll remind you next time you are raging about not being able to delete your account =P

some people are easily butthurt, yes. they must take the opinion of that individual as highly important to them.

Dude, just look at the credits of the main releases in the last few years and compare it to the authors of the comments supporting public votes on the forums. Believe it or not, you'll find a huge common set.

Twitter is looking at a few things, including limitations on how many characters or words a user would be allowed to insert or delete. According to sources, Twitter is also developing an “editorial algorithm” that, if it works correctly, would be able to “detect” whether or not a user is attempting to change the overall intention of the tweet instead of fixing a minor mistake or retracting an erroneous report.

so can you tell how big your so called "majority" is or are you making it up? only the opinions of those handful people who made the main releases of the last few years count eh? i dont think so.

Eagerly awating a list of the majority who are beside the current voting system.

There is a criteria: that's a list of people who oppose(d) anonymous voting.

And how many of those 1545 users actively participate in the work of CSDb or put out releases?

but you have claimed they are the majority. and to say that, you'll have to define who belongs to the complete group, else your list means nothing.

i dont know, do you? are you claiming less than 176?

Whatever the exact number is, it's quite obvious that

certainly less than 5 of them are keenly standing beside the anonymous voting, with you being the only vocal one.

in reality i think we should just remove (yes indeed) the ability for users to see the vote statistics and just present them the result.

I thought after the "public-votes-only" feature on CSDb this vote-discussion would end.

and then it will start over because someone else is butthurt =)

Mh. I thought after the "public-votes-only" feature on CSDb this vote-discussion would end. Why is there still a problem? I think this is a good compromise.

it will not end unless the public voting nerds got what they think is best. and then it will start over because someone else is butthurt =)

in this case the opinion is "i dont like it"

Ok, I thought the problem was that people edited their comments so that follow-up comments/replies would be messed up or suddenly have no meaning. My idea wouldn't help the moderating part, but atleast discussions/comments wouldn't be messed up because of edited/deleted posts.

Maybe csdb should get rid of the voting system altogether

Who cares about typos? The fact that someone can make a fool out of himself and not revert it when sober, hilarious! Changing opinion in time, sure, add another comment. Public excuses shows character. All great benefits available within the click of a button.

Out of the blue, here's a list of those who mentioned anonymous votes with negative connotation just here on CSDb.

A way to both disable comment editing and to compromise is to give a time limit on comment editing. For instance to allow comments to be edited only during a one hour period after posting.

If you want to make deleting comments harder, just ask confirmation via e-mail.

It would also help if people are blocked sooner when they spam all kind of threads and post useless comments.

A way to both disable comment editing and to compromise is to give a time limit on comment editing. For instance to allow comments to be edited only during a one hour period after posting.

... i hate this "fire and forget" posting attitude of today with a passion.

What if Wikipedia doesn't allow you to edit an article and you only can comment on things? I hope my point is clear now.

I rather see clean info than reading a lot of comments that results in the same info but with a lot of noise.

Comments are for commenting on a release, not for documentation and facts. Documentation should be editable by everyone. Such "release info" field is missing now for a release.

I'm really interested in an example where the disabled edit caused a problem that couldn't be solved with adding another comment or two containing updates, news or a list of revisions considering the release (and that it caused clutter or a mess of some kind).

The difference is, Wikipedia has public history/revisions, so you could see what and when was changed by whom.

The difference is, Wikipedia has public history/revisions, so you could see what and when was changed by whom.

cant decide wether thats sarcasm

wtf? fuck you arnold.