Hey all,
I'm one of the relatively new ppl here and I could be wrong but I havent seen this issue being raised anywhere so I'm going to throw an idea.
We're all familiar with the whole applaud/smite function. It is a good way for ppl to easily recognise who's been generally sensible (being generally liked or "liked" for one post doesnt make you sensible but moving on) and who's not.
However, most ppl online are cowardly enough to simply smite something because someone wrote something different than what they did and thats when the issues begin.
In my opinion lifting the anonymity factor out of this suddently will make everyone responsible for what they vote "for" or "against" and that way:
-they will think twice before voting either way
-their opinion will matter
-they can show their support, disapproval without necessarily writing whole essays or even write anything at all, hence decreasing the amount of clutter in the forums.
{ I am aware that in order for this to happen a bit of work will be required from MI so even though this suggestion is unlikely to be wildly accepted and perhaps materialise I would like to show my appreciation for his work anyways. Gj man
}
It'll be essentially like the Facebook "like" system, i.e. if there are too many "smites" or "applauds" most of the names could be revealed in a small pop-up or something (just a suggestion)
So what do you think?