To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 12622
12621  |  12623
Subject: 
Re: Compromised Functionality on Lugnet and Brickshelf?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:41:13 GMT
Viewed: 
889 times
  
In lugnet.general, Marc Nelson Jr. wrote:
   You can get the justification for the Spotlight weights here and here. This bit strikes me as particularly absurd:

    These can be tweaked as necessary. And will be, if we can’t get
    spotlighting to highlight what we believe people truly want to see
    highlighted.

Of course, the easiest way to see what people want highlighted would be to count the number of highlights. But the admins don’t see it that way, I guess.

Actually, the easiest way to make this work for everyone is to have the weighting of the spotlights settable for each person’s account. That way if I really care about color postings, I can weight that higher than someone who’s sick and tired of hearing people complain about colors. This allows people the freedom to decide what *they* want to read, not what the admins think they should be reading (based on feedback, of course).

Of course, this means that what gets spotlighted will depend on *who* is logged in, but I think that’s o.k. The default for each account would be to use the site wide weightings (the ones that some people like, and others don’t).

Also, the user interface should make it easy for a person to change between their personal spotlight weightings and the site wide weightings. That way you can always see what the admins’ spotlights are (based on feedback, of course).

The bottom line is that many people like the work the admins do, and would never set their own personal weightings. But the vocal critics who are always going to dislike seeing what the admins want them to see can set their own personal weightings.

As a programmer, I see this all the time. The product I’m working on ships with a set of defaults (the installed defaults). Site administrators that install the software can override the installed defaults on a per site basis. Individual users can override both of those defaults and set their own personal defaults. Finally, within an individual’s “working file”, the end user can override all the defaults while for that “working file”. I’d also like to see defaults at a “work group” level that would fall between the “site” level and the “user” level, but we don’t have that yet.

This paradigm of many levels of defaults not only allows site admins to choose meaningful defaults, but it also allows individual users to override those defaults to ones that make sense for their day to day work.

Jeff



1 Message in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR