Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Apr 2000 22:16:41 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
JSPROAT@IO.COMsaynotospam
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2133 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote:
> 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?
I mainly use the NNTP interface; my perception of the rating system wouldn't
change much.
> 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?
This sounds good. Instead of trying to express one's personal feelings
publicly but anonymously, a rater's motive would instead be to give feedback
to the server only. IOW, let's let someone express their opinion of my
message in a public reply. I would definitely feel better about this.
> 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 feel that something is needed, if for nothing else then for building the
Spotlight page. Scrapping the rating system in favor of something else might
be good.
> 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?
Yes. Yes. If someone disagrees with me and wants to let the world know, I at
least want to know who said it. This kind of anonymous, public reply is wide
open for abuse.
> 5. Have you ever felt victimized indirectly by seeing someone else's post
> get a high rating? How often?
Not really.
> 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?
It doesn't affect what I say before I hit the Send button.
> 7. How does your initial reaction to the announcement of the article rating
> system compare to your current opinion of it?
I am actually disappointed in how it's turned out. I stopped rating messages
a while ago, largely due to the anonymity of the system, and the lack of
feedback. If someone doesn't like what I said (or if they did), I'd like more
feedback than just a 30 or 70.
> 8. Do you feel that it is too early, too late, or the right time to address
> these issues?
Probably a little too late, but most likely just in time.
> 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...
LEGO sets, of course. Websites and web pages, probably not. e.g. I know my
web site is lacking in sparkle, and it'll stay that way -- if someone doesn't
like that, tough. If someone wants to critique my web site *content*, then
let's *discuss* it.
Cheers,
- jsproat
--
Jeremy H. Sproat <jsproat@io.com> ~~~ http://www.io.com/~jsproat/
I think the mistake a lot of us make
is thinking the state-appointed shrink is our friend.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
