Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 08:33:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2148 times
|
| |
|
|
> Ironically, the problem isn't the collection of data; the problem is
> presenting back too much data -- too easy to see details or variations and
> not know what they mean.
Hmm. As far as I can see, the main problem is neither the collection _or_ the
representation of the data but the data itself. When members vote, they are
voting on different things eg:
Do I agree with that?
Was that worded well?
Was it interesting?
Is it of value to others?
etc?
Changing the way the data is represented, does not make the data any better.
If the rating system is to stay, I think the data would be a little more
meaningful if we knew how many people have read the message - i.e. if message
is has 4 votes and 4 readers, the rating may be meaningful... but if it has had
100 readers and only 4 votes that's not so good.
Lastly, members should not be able to rate their own posts (I assume they can
right now - but I'm not 100% sure).
Scott A
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
