Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 17:18:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1980 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.announce, Todd Lehman writes:
<snip>
>
> 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?
It doesn't matter to me.
> 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?
It doesn't matter to me.
> 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)
Worse, slightly .. The feature does have its benefits.
> 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?
No. I don't find validation in what others think of my stuff. I ask for
comments for other inspiration and ideas that they might generate. I don't
even ask my wife what she thinks of my stuff.
> 5. Have you ever felt victimized indirectly by seeing someone else's post
> get a high rating? How often?
No. I don't begrudge "good fortune" to others. Not even to Sanjay ;-)
> 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 makes it harder only where casual reading material (generated by ratings)
is concerned. It doesn't bother me if the casual reader has an equally
presented way of reading everything else too.
> 7. How does your initial reaction to the announcement of the article rating
> system compare to your current opinion of it?
It's the same..: "I hope it's done right.." (Whatever that is :)
> 8. Do you feel that it is too early, too late, or the right time to address
> these issues?
It's never too late.. cuz the administrator actually listens. Very few ideas
are perfect out of the bag.
> 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 think displayed ratings attached to those things would be helpful at
all to everyone at large. To me, if the ratings were displayed, it seems that
those with higher ratings would get higher ones (often due to drive-by's), and
low ratings would remain or ever only slowly creep up (unless the content
found in such subjects was dramatically improved, and an effort made to
promote "my awesome new site"). Overall, some will be depressed by it, some
won't care, and others will see it as a challenge to improve.. and there isn't
much you can do to change someone.
CLSotW is like this. If someone's page never wins, does that mean it's not
cool? Of course not. Cool is often in the eye of the beholder(s). But at the
same time, whoever made that site feels a certain way about it, either
indifferent or otherwise. Yet you can't change how they feel.. only they can.
-Tom McD.
when replying, until 1967, spamcake was used in football pads.
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
