 | | Re: Article scoring —Shiri Dori
|
| | | 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)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) 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 —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | Upon more reflection, I'm thinking that the "square-rooted-average" sum(V,1,n) w = ---...--- sqrt(n) isn't so great afterall. Its biggest plus is that it distinguishes nicely between sets of votes which have the same average and a different number (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes: [snip a lot of math] (...) where in here does it take into account how many people are in the group? Can you weigh in the number of people who are subscribed to that group? Since they are the ones most (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Implicitly in the n variable; nowhere explicitly. (...) Well, it's nearly impossible to know the number of people subscribed to a given group, and it's even more impossible to know how many people have read and understood a given message. It (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) That was (almost) my first question/concern, as well. (...) Hmm. I'd like to see something available, at least through SMTP, assuming users-of-newsreaders could vote by forwarding messages to one (or more) vote-accounts. Then again, I haven't (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | Wow, that's cool! The geek in me is waking up... So basically what you said here, is that every message gets one vote from the system as a softner - and that the vote is always zero. Wow. Again, cool. -Shiri (a real geek at heart) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Ya, except that the one vote from the system will probably be implicit (rather than explicit), and applied only on-the-fly while calculating the final rating, otherwise every article would show with a score of zero and one mysterious vote. In (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) And it at least as much sense to have an implicit 'indifferent' vote from the system as it does to have a special rule for the case of zero votes. Steve (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | (...) Well, the neat thing is, either way, there actually isn't a special case after all. That is, in the specific case of zero votes, there doesn't have to be a logic-fork because the sum of zero votes is 0, and dividing 0 by n+1 (n=0) is still 0. (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) ^^^...^^^ (...) Steve, I'm glad you mentioned that -- because from a "makes sense" point of view, I think it's much harder to explain to voters that the article's score is sum(V,1,n)/(n+1) [n voters] than it is simply to explain that the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) (hey, anything to help out) [snipped all the stuff I agree with] (...) How about radio buttons instead of a drop-down list? Seems more approachable for the non-geeks among us. (...) You could let people choose a score from 1 to 10. This is (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) OH! Yes, radio buttons. When the number of choices is small, maybe that's the way to go. OTOH, radio buttons in GUI web browsers are smaller "targets" than list boxes. Does MSIE know how to automagically group text associated with a radio (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | (...) IIRC, from my days of dabbling with java, you could make a radiobox, and make the lable to it a link with no HREF, just with a ONCLICK java script thing, that will select the appropriate radio button. Will that work? (...) The thing is, if (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I think it could all be done in JavaScript, ya. I wouldn't want to _require_ JavaScript for something like article scoring, but the nice thing about it in this case is that adding it wouldn't hurt; it would degrade gracefully to normal plain (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | (...) Hmm. Thinking back to the desired slider interface, you could put a good number of radio buttons horizontally across a page. The voter could click in the desired range. Something like: Very Bad Neutral Very Good O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | (...) That would rock!! (...) I don't think the HTML would be too heavy, but it could get pretty nasty on the web browser (depending on how many buttons there were per article). I seem to remember the Fibblesnork LEGO Survey pages (which each have (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) OK, a couple of more thoughts on the [-100,+100] vs. [0,100] choice... I'm finding it increasingly difficult to defend the position of [-100,+100] due to a number of reasons. One which I don't think came up yet is how a new or casual user (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) <snip> (...) Yes, it makes a lot of sense, and I agree. (...) Right. (...) Meaning...? (...) I wouldn't be too sure it's so complex... then again, I'm a math geek so I wouldn't know ;-) (...) The last two are, IMO, HUGE advantadges for the (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) If numbers are avoided on the voting UI, this 'first vote effect' won't be so noticeable, because people won't be immediately aware of the math behind the voting system. There'll probably be the occasional question (because someone just read (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) A typographically correct minus sign is 1 en wide, which is typically about twice the width of a hyphen in most typefaces. HTML has the – entity which is 1 en wide, and the — entity which is 1 em wide, but AFAIK these aren't (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Tony Priestman
|
| | | | | | | | | | | On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Todd Lehman (<Fr6srt.IrF@lugnet.com>) wrote at 03:38:17 (...) I think this has been at the back of my mind all along. I don't use the web i/f, so I've mostly avoided commenting. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I thought about that too, but I figured that: 1. Most (not necessarily all, but most) people who would get hurt feelings would tend to post indifferent posts. 2. Unless a post is strongly 'bad', people aren't going to give it a negative vote. (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Jacob Sparre Andersen
|
| | | | | | | | | | Todd: [ ... ] (...) Although I find the [-100,+100] range more intuitive, I think you are right that [0,+100] is the range to use for article scoring. Play well, Jacob (who never claimed to be ordinary ;-) ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) OK, looks like this is going to work great! On the screen, it's looking much cleaner than what I had before with the drop-down list. A not-too-big-yet-not-to-small number of radio buttons with a neat numeric spread is 6, which yields the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) OK, pruning this down to be as simple as possible -- while still retaining the option to include an edit box for fine-tuning later down the road -- it turns out that a six-position set of radio buttons is really slick. :) Eliminating the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) "submitted opinions:" ?? "Shared opinions:" ?? (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Tony Priestman
|
| | | | | | On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Steve Bliss (<ctgfcsop8uaj5lc1dc...25o1pt@4ax .com>) wrote at 15:47:34 (...) Perhaps if the numbers were mapped to a coloured indicator? You could have an orange-red for high scores, & blue-green for lows, with a spectrum in (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Interesting idea with the blue, BTW -- although it's generally not a great idea to use blue, purple, or magenta text on white-background web pages (because of traditional HTML link colors), there might actually be an advantage in using blue (...) (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) Isn't that redundant? Steve Bliss (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) Yah, pretty much, I guess. :) Although _Eye_of_the_Needle_ first season wasn't bad, was it? --Todd (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Article scoring —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) Yeah, that one was good. Actually, there have been a number of good Voyager episodes. And some real stinkers. My vote for the worst episode: _The_Omega_Directive_. Steve (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
