Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 03:29:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2148 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Shiri Dori writes:
> > Right; but pure numbers aren't really helping. Categorizing posts
> > by "usefulness" is downright inappropriate and unhelpful. Because what's
> > useful and important to someone (e.g. info about a cool new mindstorms set
> > that is sighted in stores), will be useless to me and vice versa.
>
> That's what the averaging effect is for -- to smooth that out.
Well- yeah. But at the current amounts of rating (most posts get no more than
two ratings) the averaging effect doesn't smooth much out.
I totally forgot to mention in my long post that I actually stopped regarding
a rating of a post as a factor of whether I'm going to read it or not. I just
ignore the rating, because I've noticed that the rating had nothing to do with
my perspective on the post whatsoever.
> If the system
> also could learn what you liked, you might find that helpful. (That's a long
> way down the road, though.)
Yes... the thought occured to me that perhaps, while posting, one could
(optionally) check off any number of boxes describing the post
(e.g. "MOC", "market", "set opinion"). Then each reader could specify what
things he would and would not like to see.
> > [...]
> > Right! "Fluff" is one of the things I like in lugnet, we are here day-in and
> > day-out; and there aren't Brad Justus posts every day, or MTT sightings
> > every
> > week. Lugnet contains of a whole lot of fluff, and I personally like to read
> > it-- and see what's happening every day, regardless if it's highly "useful".
>
> Will you still feel that way when there are 4x the number of messages daily?
> A year and a half ago, there were only 80-100 messages a day (on average).
> Now there are 350-400 a day (on average). At some point, the fluff becomes
> too much. And you may already have an unusually high liking or tolerance for
> that sort of thing. Not everyone out there so much time to read everything.
You're right. That hadn't occured to me. When I think of it, I spend more time
on lugnet than the average fan (1) and I check it every 10 minutes or so (more
often if I'm really bored). I guess I *do* tolerate fluff more than other
people, because lugnet for me is not only a mean for sharing my hobby (lego)
with other fans, but also a source of communication with people. (1)
I still think that word strings will provide better feedback and guidance (as
to what to read/what not) than numbers, though. But if the RSS ends up having
number ratings, I'd set my prefs to "show any message regardless of the
rating" because I, personally, like to read it all.
-Shiri
(1) What can I say? I'm in a bad social situation right now, my only friends
live 7 time-zones away from me and I mostly communicate with people (2) via
the net. I also have a lot of free time on my hands because I don't hang out
with my friends (it's a bit hard considering the geographical differences ;-).
(2) both my friends from Israel, and AFOLs.
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
