 | | Re: Article scoring
|
|
On Sat, 4 Mar 2000, Todd Lehman (<FqvI8u.LzE@lugnet.com>) wrote at 01:17:18 (...) So what's it for? A surrogate for me-too posts? Speaking as an NNTP person, I juge articles by the number of replies they get, and I wouldn't see any of this at all. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) I'm not sure if referenced votes *should* be weighted differently, I just thought I'd throw it in :) Hmm.. if you did weight top-20 page posts differently, then *really* cool posts in low-traffic groups would still get ignored.. unless you (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The cat is out of the bag (or, this is OFF-TOPIC.DEBATE!!!)
|
|
(...) Why are you asking me? Why not ask the guy who started this discussion? What part of "Off-topic.debate" isn't clear? This has actually been a very good discussion - much better than most. This has been the most benign discussion I have ever (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 4x2ReVu: 4950 Loader Dozer
|
|
(...) Thought it was me he was trying to provoke! Jeez, following a thread in 4 different groups is hard - I would never have seen Nan Zhou's apology in .underground if you hadn't referred to it! Kevin (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Factoring going off line for a while
|
|
(...) Yes. But let me force a cookie to be stored if I want to as well, even if the server thinks there is one there... and let it be my OLD cookie if I want. Sometimes my machines get screwed up. Sometimes I may have copied a cookie file over but (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) LOL! I'd be willing to endure that as long as it supports lugnet ;-) -Shiri (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Direct links to sets (was:Re: TEST TEST TEST)
|
|
(...) Wow, cool! Since when did this start?! -Shiri (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.test, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) I almost get what you're getting at, but I'm stuck on one part of it. In the early stages of an article's appearance, let's say it's position 19 out of 20 on a top-20 page, and let's say only 7 people have voted +1 on it so far. Should it, in (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) Ah, that makes *all* the difference! The danger of someone taking out 100 LUGNET memberships to skew the votes and always have the most 'interesting' messages.. isn't really a danger! Richard (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) Oh -- while I was out grocery shopping I just realized this: What is sqrt(n)? It's nothing more than a fancy way of writing n^(1/2). So: What if the exponent didn't have to be exactly 1/2, but instead was allowed to vary? Then what dynamics (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) Ah - yep I understood the sqrt part. What I meant is that creating a list of the most popular messages skews the vote - because the most votes will end up being put on items on the list, only because people use the list to browse. From a (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) Oh-- OH! ... that makes it clearer. I was thrown off by Richard's first sentence - "Sounds Funky! Wouldn't it be nice to have..." (...) I agree. It all depends on people's range of interest. I mean, if 100 people responded in a +1 feedback to (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) Wait, are you talking now about the slope of the function or the value of the function? I thought Richard was asking if having a "Top X" list sorted by the value of the scoring function (not its slope or second derivative, which would have (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) It'll just use the Member ID to verify who you are. All magically and transparently through cookies. You have to be logged in, of course, and only Members can moderate (cast votes). (...) The system would enforce one vote per person, so the (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) IMHO, it absolutely should be allowed, yes! The worst you could artificially boost the scores on your own messages is relatively tiny anyway -- once a few other people also have cast votes. I would also argue that it's not necessarily (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) No, I think he means: create a place where the most positive-feedback messages of the day/week/time unit are displayed, so that people don't have to read all the letters and check each scoring individually, but find all the 'popular' messages (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) You mean a positive-feedback loop producing progressively higher and higher values for popular articles? That's what the sqrt() function is for -- to dampen by applying a nonlinear but still monotonically increasing function to the divisor. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) Maybe a simple IP check? It's not perfect, but if someone goes to all the trouble of getting different IP addresses to vote from, then maybe they have something important to say! I wonder if someone would click their market.auction posting (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
(...) The only reason I read Slashdot is because of the article scoring. Not a bad system, that. But I'm enough of a narcissist that I'd be prone to artificially boost the score on my own messages. And I suspect I'm not alone. (You know who you are. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Article scoring
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes: <interesting (to me) yet long techie details snipped> Great! I like this and agree to the reasoning, 'specially the sqrt part of more people voting influencing more. (...) ;-) (...) I agree, cool! (...) (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
