Subject:
|
Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Apr 2005 16:51:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
418 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Marc Nelson Jr. wrote:
| |
I agree that people not highlighting isn’t necessarily a bad thing, UNLESS
those people then complain about what shows up in the spotlight. Instead of
encouraging those dissatisfied people to highlight more often, the admins
rejiggered the spotlight results to satisfy the complainers.
|
Um, I encourage people to spotlight posts every chance I get...
| |
Why not use the existing mechanism (which is open to all members of LUGNET)
to correct the perceived problem, instead of changing the whole scheme from
the top
|
Adjusting spotlight weights isn’t changing the whole scheme, though, is it?
Spotlight weights have been around for a very long time and they get
periodically adjusted.
| |
(which is an option open only to the admins and those who have the
ear of the admins)?
|
Everyone has the ear of the admins.
| |
The whole weights system looks like an attempt to control what gets discussed
on LUGNET, and that is my problem with it. If that is not the intent, why not
just implement the
skip-filter on the spotlight?
|
That takes a code change. And not necessarily an easy one either. Worse, it may
have a serious impact on overall performance, not sure, since the currrent
spotlight list is calculated globally once every few minutes instead of
specifically (with respect to a particular person’s filter) every time a page is
viewed.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
3 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
