Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 02:46:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2027 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd & All,
> However, it seems that the high visibility of both the raw and composite
> numbers are having an overall negative effect on the community's morale.
> Some of the deeper concerns are raised in this message and its replies:
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=6130
I pretty much agree with Thomas Main's assessments of the rating system. I
don't use the system in terms of the website interface, since I get all my
LUGNET info from the NNTP. One of the most visible complaints I have of the
ratings system is the inability of seeing these ratings on the various
postings submitted on the web interface locally.
> Clearly, these are very strong feelings being expressed by people. How • many
> others feel this way? What would you like to see happen? Post your • thoughts
> as a reply to this message (or reply privately if you prefer not to post • your
> thoughts publicly).
See above.
> It was never a purpose of the ratings system to make anyone ever feel bad
> or unwanted or unwelcome. It's core purpose is simply to highlight "neat • or
> noteworthy stuff" but not to downgrade "un-neat or un-noteworthy stuff" or
> regular "fluff" (which there's nothing wrong with).
Hmm... this sounds interesting in theorey, but knowing a little bit of human
nature, it can be abused. If I really don't like someone in debate, or in
another area, I can trash all their posts by giving them a 0 or 10. (I have
not done this, BTW, I have not voted for any posts one way or another)
I think this is a matter of interpretation of what a 0 rating as opposed to
a 100 or a 90. Some people differ on intrepretations.
> It seem that no amount of education about what the numbers mean will be • able
> to make a meaningful dent in the natural inclination to view, say, a 40 as
> having baeen "marked down" from its default of 50. Even if the default • were
> changed from 50 to 0 (so that numbers tended almost always to climb rather
> than to climb half of the time and fall half of the time), it seems likely
> that feelings will still be hurt, because it seems that some people are • hurt
> by the fact that others are getting 80's and 90's while they are getting • 40's
> or 50's or 60's. Going with a scale 0 to 100, in retrospect, hasn't been • any
> better from an overall morale point of view than if a scale -100 to +100 • had
> been used.
>
> 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?
Since I don't see them, I don't know. I guess if I would use the web
interface, I would probably not read the lower rating ones. I read a
majority of the e-mails I get, unless I am definately not interested in it
(IE Castle auctions) I don't think displaying the numbers is good.
> 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 think this is better. That way you can still generate the hotlists
automatically.
> 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)
Well, I don't think it is necessary to remove it all together, private
voting might be better.
> 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?
Well, I don't know if any of my posts have been, I frankly don't care
anymore if they do, simply because I am a big guy and can take it. I would
hate to see debate anymore, however, especially since I am not in the
"majority" in terms of leftists thinking. I think this is an area where
ratings do little.
> 5. Have you ever felt victimized indirectly by seeing someone else's post
> get a high rating? How often?
Well, from what I have seen, some of the postings get really bad ratings for
no reason, and some get good ratings for, IMO, are not. It is a flawed
system in terms of some people throwing off the numbers.
> 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. That is one of the reasons I dropped out of debate. It does bother
me.
> 7. How does your initial reaction to the announcement of the article • rating
> system compare to your current opinion of it?
I think my concerns were promptly validated.
> 8. Do you feel that it is too early, too late, or the right time to • address
> these issues?
I think it is a good thing, before it goes for too long.
> 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 don't really think I would want a ratings system on my page. i am
flattered if people visit it, period. I would hate to have mine downgraded
because of my lack of html. My website will undergo a major change, since I
have learned a lot since I put it together, once I get the my steatlh
project going. I think I good way of portraying websites would be a major
links page with themes, and construction techniques and so on, and you could
submit your thoughts on building mechs, or something.
> Thanks for your time,
> --Todd
Thank you, Todd, for your continuous efforts to get LUGNET as good as it can
be. I for one, still enjoy it, and look forward to the improvements ahead.
It is a substantial monument to all AFOL'S to have a home on the internet to
share and exchange ideas, projects, likes, dislikes, etc. and I am glad to
be a part of it. : )
Sincerely,
Scott S.
--
Scott E. Sanburn
Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> http://www.aeieng.com
LEGO Page -> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/3372/legoindex.html
Coming Soon: The Sanburn Systems Company
>
> [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
|
|
|
|
