Suggestion anonymity

I've been thinking, and it seems like good suggestions die when influential users (staff or donors) nay-say these ideas. I suggest implementing a way to hide all indication of who's post is whose when people make threads and posts in the suggestion section. Granted, often the suggestions die because the influential user has been around long enough and can elaborate on reasons why one suggestion or another won't work. However, I've seen staff or donors say "no, because of X and Y" (and have done so myself), and people bandwagon with this person, and there's no more room for discussion, there's no possibility to negotiate changes that would fix reasons X and Y and make the suggestion plausible. Not only that, but I know for a fact, when someone sees a newfag post a bright-eyed, bushy tailed suggestion, their instinct reaction is "he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, he's a newfag". That isn't always the case, some newfags could genuinely have a good idea, and adding anonymity would eliminate bias towards the people who post threads and those who reply.

One solid example I can think of is x339 and his suggestions. I've personally read people's reactions to some of his suggestions in the IRC, and there were one or two people who would be like
>x339 posts
>autodeny trololol

And whether or not everyone agrees, there would be a few bandwagoners for sure and nothing gets done.

So anyway, to sum up: hide post-bit, avatars and signatures in the Suggestions forum.

 

I don't think the post-bit, avatar and signatures should be hidden in here, just give the option that people can post anonymously and have it approved, similar to the dispute forum and RaSC.

I'd support it as some people don't feel comfortable suggesting for fear of ridicule. It may increase the volume of suggestions.

 

I think it's a great idea. I'd be all for an anonymous post option.

 

It would be too much work to have to wait for approval or to submit an anonymous comment to be posted by the site's "Anonymous" user (usually used for feedback), especially when all you might want to say is "support"

 

Support, fantastic idea. Some people with troll type reputations or just flat out disliked have good ideas as well and peoples previous ideas about them do affect their support of said ideas.

 

Support, in this specific forum, we're here solely for what's said and not who it's said by.

 

Is this only for the suggestion forum? If it's forum wide, no support. If it's only within the suggestion forum, then maybe. How would it work? Would only Admin's be able to see the thread creator, and posters within that thread?

I agree, it would rule out certain bias and bandwaggoning.

 

If it can be done in the support forum I don't see why the suggestion forum would be an issue. I don't think it'd need administrative input, suggestion forum sectional and global would be fine? There aren't many cases they'd need to be denied unless they were spam in which case I doubt people would use an approval only forum.

Edit: by approval only I mean approval if you're anonymous.

 

As the title suggests, it would be JUST the Suggestion forum. It would work by hiding the post bit, avatar, and signature of those who post in the suggestion forum. It would be ideal for staff to be able to see who is posting in case they need to exercise mod actions.

The support forum lets you post as an unregistered user, but that's a little too out of the way for suggestions imo. My suggestion makes it to where you simply can't see post-bit and signatures when someone posts, just their message.

 

My bad, I misunderstood. If it's easy enough to implement I don't see how it could do any harm to have it done.

 

Bumping this for pertinence. This is a great idea and should be implemented to avoid reputations cluttering the validity of ideas . I think moderators aside from sythe and possibly admins to be able to see who posted (just in case of abuse of the system)

 

http://www.sythe.org/suggestions/1502018-sythe-store.html

I think I sort of get it now why this would be a good idea...

 

The idea he suggested is terrible, even if I posted in anonymity or if he posted in anonymity I would still state my opinion of how dumb the idea is.

 

I agree with this suggestion because you're a mod.

But in all seriousness, yeah I agree, it would stop ass kissers just agreeing out of popularity. But if a suggestion is bad, like Punjabi said... People are still going to say its bad.

 

I personally don't think you should remove a person's credibility just because people agree with them. Ultimately the decision is left to the admins if they see potential in an idea they should work from there and see how the community feels about it by working with the OP to see his/ her insight to the new idea.

Whether people bandwagon or not a good idea will not be bad and vice versa. In reality speakers don't hide their faces when they make a speech.

 

I actually agree with this.
The fact someone with some popularity doesn't agree with a suggestion and someone else follows in their steps, that doesn't mean the suggestion is bad and won't be implemented. If its obvious a suggestion is complete rubbish, it will be denied. If its amazing and hugely beneficial yet has bad responses it will still be implemented for being a great idea.

 

Exhibit B

A valid post made by a user is shot down because "I don't think you know what you're talking about"

 

Nobodies hopped on his bandwagon and nobody will, he's also the same guy who referred to Rsprod as lawless and video as a dumb ass.

He will discredit anyone who goes against him whether they post anonymously or not. I don't see that post being a reason to make something anonymous that guy would have flamed him whether it was anonymous or not.

Posts like that should be infracted and discouraged.

He even flames laptop when he removed his post.

 

90% of the posts in this thread relate to reputations.

+ anonymity...

00% of the posts in this thread would relate to reputations.

 

The point made is that people to naysay based on who you are. It doesn't necessarily mean that this one person changes the tide of support for a suggestion, although that's just as possible if that person were more reputable, but their vote still counts for something, and I'd rather not see ANY vote cast with a biased opinion