If we apply a cost/benefit analysis to the voting etc., the potential costs are the cultivation of pride, the devaluation of hard truths, the marginalization of good, though unpopular, posters.... The potential benefits are negligible in comparison.

No!
You're missing the point.

If someone is severely unpopular on CathInfo, there is likely a problem with THEM and need to correct themselves -- even if only to learn some humility and/or tact.

What "hard truths" are the majority of CathInfo members going to reject? Only FALSEHOODS that are not truths at all.

When you think you're the cream of Traditional Catholicism -- the "Creme de la creme", it becomes a problem. You get guys like CM "I'm more traditional than 99.9% of traditional Catholics out there!"

The Like/Dislike system is to help sort the wheat from the chaff among traditional Catholics. It is there to discourage rudeness, axe-grinding, and extremism.

This is CathInfo, not Youtube.  Get it? We're traditional Catholics here. We all have the Faith. We define what is "normal". A "Normal" or "mainstream" CATHINFO MEMBER is a good thing.

If you're unpopular here, you're more likely to be a  lunatic than "a faithful follower of the Crucified Master".


You're confusing fitting in with the world with fitting in with Christ's Church. We are SUPPOSED to conform, be normal, etc. among Christ's followers.

But the cantankerous Sedes you refer to are quite a minority, when it comes down to it.

Ok, there is no ipso facto "you're not Catholic" if you're not popular here, but you'd at least have to be *controversial*, for example someone who enjoys arguing with the Sedes in the Crisis subforum (and doesn't post about anything else).  You're going to get some bumps and bruises, and I think most people can see that.

Anyone who's been on CathInfo for long knows what the threads in the Crisis subforum are like. That's why some people avoid that subforum altogether.

I suppose my assumption (in my above post) was that you had a *really bad* popularity score. That could only be achieved by consistently needling one side or the other, and not posting ANYTHING non-controversial.

Note that I didn't say arguing with -- I said needling. You can disagree and not make a swarm of enemies. There are some that have no tact or charity, and YES it's going to hurt them. But they need to learn charity and tact to become better Catholics. You don't convert people with a whip and a scourge. You convert them with the sweetness of Christ.

I don't see Gladius or Raoul downvoting every pro-SSPX post in the Crisis sub-forum. It's just not happening at this time. If we have problems going forward, I can put in limitations on how many downvotes, etc. but we haven't had a problem thus far.

Matthew

I think you're getting techno-fever and losing sight of the fact that this is a simple message board where various catholics come to opine.  It has less a status in reality than a regularly scheduled coffee house meeting between friends.  I think if one of the friends decided he would put himself in "charge" and introduce all manner of mechanism in order to arbitrarily weigh and measure opinions as a reflection of their catholicity sooner than later he would be the only one left at the monthly meeting.  This whole thing strikes me as eerily similiar to that sad mentality adopted by the gentleman "Quis" over at Fisheaters.  So distorted was his concept of reality as exercised though a message board that I believe he really did think he had some kind of "authority" over other Catholics and that his "judgment" actually meant more than an opinion conjured up in his mind.  This misperception happens to internet "apologists" all the time.  They very soon begin to operate under the assumption that their opinions count, at least ever so slightly in the beginning, as something more than they actually are.  Let this go unchecked and monsters like Jimmy Akin and Karl Keating are created.  Men who are simply not susceptible to correction.  Couple this delusion caused by technology with "Quis's" severely imbalaced personality in other respects and you had a poor Catholic man reduced to a pitiable state treating other Catholics as his "subjects" and "banning" people as a form of excommunication at least according to his darkened mind.  Certainly you haven't gone that far and have retained, on the whole, a remarkable balance, but all these added features, coupled with that last statement, caused me to voice my concern.      

The like/dislike feature is just a tool for people holding grudges to downrate people they don't like.

Can't answer an argument?  Then downrate the post.  It's very feminine to secretly attack an enemies reputation.

I can see why women like it - since they'll never be the target of a systematic downrate campaign.  It gives them the opportunity to attack the ideas (of course it is also feminine to be unable to separate the idea from the person) they don't like without having to put up any actual criticism.

The like/dislike feature is just a tool for people holding grudges to downrate people they don't like.

Can't answer an argument?  Then downrate the post.  It's very feminine to secretly attack an enemies reputation.

I can see why women like it - since they'll never be the target of a systematic downrate campaign.  It gives them the opportunity to attack the ideas (of course it is also feminine to be unable to separate the idea from the person) they don't like without having to put up any actual criticism.

It sounds like you're becoming a misogynist. This isn't good. Women are God's creatures. They are good. What you object to is today's deformation of femininity. It sounds like you may be allowing some bad experiences with women to sully your reason with regard to women. Be careful. Initiate course corrective procedures at once.

I was the only boy growing up with three sisters. If I can still love women, so can you!

It sounds like you're becoming a misogynist.

That sounds like a very feminine response.  Notice, men can act in feminine ways as well as women.  I notice you didn't object to my observation about women, but rather to me personally, saying I don't like women. (which isn't true at all)

This isn't good.

lol, I know, that's why you claimed I am one - because you want to answer my observation by impugning me with the label of "woman-hater" - which is a lie.

Women are God's creatures.

Certainly.

They are good.

Men are God's creatures too, but I don't think anyone here would every say that men are good.  But you say women are good without hesitation.  That shows that you're not thinking critically.

What you object to is today's deformation of femininity.

Most of the bad traits we see in women today are grotesque exaggerations of those bad traits of women that are universal in time and place, and that go back to Eve.

It sounds like you may be allowing some bad experiences with women to sully your reason with regard to women.

No, my reason with regard to women is quite sound.  On the other hand, the desire to chalk up an observation that I make to "bad experiences with women" is a typical feminine criticism.  You are certainly proving and reinforcing the point I made above.

Be careful. Initiate course corrective procedures at once.

LOL!  Immediately start pandering to women!  For some men, that seems to them their only option.  Sad but true.

I was the only boy growing up with three sisters. If I can still love women, so can you!

I like women more than men.  I like people who are nice to me, and women are nice to me.  But I'm not going to willfully deceive myself about the character defects of women.  That IS a recipe for disaster

Tele, I do wonder if there are any women at all over the age of 20 that you respect as not being yet another victim of the modern world.

I'd venture to say that for most of us the number would be small, but certainly at least a few.

Tele, I do wonder if there are any women at all over the age of 20 that you respect as not being yet another victim of the modern world.

You're definitely confusing things.  The sort of girl I want to marry versus the sort of woman I like and respect are two entirely different things.