These Stupid Stars

[Tresco]

A while ago it was discovered that the 'Rate this Topic' function does not work.

Only the first person to 'rate' a topic is able to do so. I've noticed recently a spate of 'one star' ratings appear next to threads, sometimes when there have been no replies, or perhaps one.

I don't know if the person/people who are using the stars are aware that the so called function does not work, or whether they do know and are doing it deliberately I don't really see how possible benefits/value of a thread can be assessed so quickly so i'm wondering if it is the latter, someone dishing out a little , knowing the rating can't be altered by anyone elses opinion.

As this system is faultly anyway, is there any chance at all of either fixing it, or getting rid of it?

In the meantime, bearing in mind it does not work, will the people using it consider stopping doing so?

I'll sit back now and wait for someone to rate this as a one star

[Tresco]

To the person who rated this 5 stars

[Dick Smith]

[Fantine<br><br><br><br>Susie]

The thing that gets me is the meaning of the stars. Unless anyone has gone to 'rate' a thread and clicked on the button, they will not know that one or two stars actually means that the thread is bad/terrible.

Generally, I would guess that stars are awarded for good things, and like hotels, varying from 1 to 5 on how good they are, but on here it means the opposite in the case of one two or three stars and only good if 4 or 5 stars are awarded.

[Christine Animal]

I would always rate you five star, Mrs. Tresco  

[Teamedup]

There was a star next to a post I did and I didn't put a star on it. I don't understand the stars either.

[Tresco]

All anyone needs to know or understand is that the function is faulty.

Dick put 5 stars on this topic.

Now, no one could really say this is a wonderful topic, it was just me getting something off my chest, and hopefully alerting others to the fact the 'function' is bobbins.

No one can change the 'rating' Dick gave, go on give it a try.

[Swissbarry]

I was a teacher for thirty odd years, and taught a variety of children of all ages, some with learning difficulties, some with emotional and behavioural disorders, some with a history of crime and delinquency.

The vast majority of them could be conned into trying harder or changing their behaviour by the award of "stars".  Gold stars were especially effective.

But there were a few - usually those with IQs above 80 - who saw through it.  These individuals would respond to material rewards, or even verbal encouragement and praise, but the idea of being a "star" held no great attraction for them.

[Tresco]

Swiss Barry introduces yet another variation on Stupid Stars.

What gets me is that people get their kids spending hours and hours creating these star charts, hours which could be spent doing useful things like housework

Then they award stars even when the child has not achieved a satisfactory level in say, hoovering the living room.

If I was to make one of these charts for a child, the reward icons would be things like 'marmite sandwich' or 'a drink of water'.

Are we on the same wavelength Swiss, or did you mean something else by 'material rewards'?

[Swissbarry]

Yes, Tresco, I think we're as one one this.  Educational psychologists used to call the awarding of stars a "behaviour modification programme".  That's because educational psychologists are pricks.  What they meant was that children (and adults for that matter) would alter their behaviour in return for what they saw as rewards. 

Now, the choice of rewards is always interesting.  For instance, there isn't much of my behaviour that I wouldn't modify for a bacon sandwich, but other people need to be persuaded by the promise of cash, or a trophy, or heavy sex, or whatever.  

The point I was trying to make was that as rewards go, gold stars are pretty rudimentary.  Your average chimpanzee wouldn't be fooled into modifying his behaviour in return for anything less than a banana, yet some human beings will completely change their ways in order to gain a gold star. 

Now, dear readers - what would you have me do for a bacon sandwich?

[Patf]

I suspect that the rash of stars is due to one contributer who posts amusing threads (not you Swiss Barry ) and once said he/she didn't like serious threads. Mentioning no names......  Pat.

[Teamedup]

I had some bacon in two days ago and my dear husband took it to work. So now I find myself drooling over the idea of a sandwich I can't have. Sorry SB if I had one, I'd eat it, no matter what you would do for one.

[Tresco]

That's because educational psychologists are pricks.  What they meant was that children (and adults for that matter) would alter their behaviour in return for what they saw as rewards. 

Well, I don't know where to start. Not only can we say Coco's name, without fear of asterixxxxxes, but also Scunthorpe (Alcazar is happy) and also pricks.  I don't think every single child psychologist can be described this way. I know at least two psychologists, (out of many I have met), who are very decent people, it's true, they are wierd and don't fit in generally, and definitely not into 'psychological' circles, but they are good people.

The point I was trying to make was that as rewards go, gold stars are pretty rudimentary.  Your average chimpanzee wouldn't be fooled into modifying his behaviour in return for anything less than a banana, yet some human beings will completely change their ways in order to gain a gold star. 

 Gold stars are rubbish, they are tarnished goods (especially here). I disagree with you anyway; never mind dubious IQ ratings, most 6 year olds only do the star chart (make it, that is) to stop parents going on at them. That is the real reward for them.

Something I learnt a long time ago was actually trying to be good myself, you know, being decent, fairly rational;  it was in a way too late for my poor child, when he was a child, but still it is never really too late, other peoples children benefit, I hope.

There is no reward for eating a bacon sandwich. Just how you feel.