Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Apr 2000 19:21:07 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2031 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi Todd,
My personal feedback. I think the ratings system has caused me to post less,
if that's a concern or not. I haven't felt belittled or berated, but I tend
to think nobody reads my posts when I see it rated by less than 3 people and
it rated poorly. If a hundred people rated my post, even if it was voted
down, I feel like my voice has been heard. Even though I know it's not true,
but the rating gives you the impression that "nobody read this, nobody
cares."
Conversely, I completely ignore the ratings on other people's posts. I'm
after info on certain topics. There's not enough people rating to make it
seem worth looking at.
>
> Specific personal questions:
>
> 1. How would you feel (better or worse) if the numeric values of the ratings
> were not displayed to you unless you specifically requested (via some simple
> setting) that they be displayed to you?
Even if my ratings were hidden, I still would want to see what it said.
Remember, ratings and responses are the only gauge Lugnet gives for people
reading your posts. I suppose I would constantly check my own and never check
anyone elses.
> 2. How would you feel (better or worse) if the numeric values of the ratings
> were not displayed ever to anyone but collected and used by the server only
> for internal calculations, hotlist generation, and personal recommendations
> to you?
I would like that better. I just don't know if what YOU think I like, is
equal to what I think I like. When you tell me, "this is what you like," I'll
probably tell you, "No it isn't." My interests usually don't line up with the
majority opinion.
> 3. How would you feel (better or worse) if the ratings were not even
> collected and collated in the first place? (i.e. the destruction of the
> feature altogether)
I'd like that better still.
> 4. Have you ever felt victimized by the rating system? Have you posted
> something which has obtained a low rating and felt uncomfortable or unhappy
> about yourself or about LUGNET because of the low rating? How often?
I'd like to believe that very few things make me feel victimized, Oprah. :O)
My life doesn't ride on what 3 or 4 Lugnet members think about my post. I
post less than I did before the ratings because it gives me the impression
that people aren't reading what I'm posting.
> 5. Have you ever felt victimized indirectly by seeing someone else's post
> get a high rating? How often?
Never victimized.
> 6. Do you feel that the article rating system makes it easier for you or
> harder for you to share your ideas? And does this bother you?
Harder. I just feel less inclined to share.
> 7. How does your initial reaction to the announcement of the article rating
> system compare to your current opinion of it?
about the same.
>
> 8. Do you feel that it is too early, too late, or the right time to address
> these issues?
If I saw an increase in ratings, I'd say too early. But I don't think most
people rate them and it doesn't look like that's on the increase. It would
make a difference if either of the above were true. (Being too early, I mean)
> 9. What other areas (besides news articles) can you imagine that a
> collaborative ratings system would be most helpful to you? LEGO sets?
> Websites? Individual web pages? etc...
I like when sets are rated, it gives me an idea on whether I would like it,
but that's only if they tell me why they like or dislike it. A numeric system
tells me zero. I think you have that covered in one of the groups. I just
wish it had more participation.
> Thanks for your time,
> --Todd
>
> [followups to .admin.general]
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
309 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
