Subject:
|
Re: New feature: Article rating
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 Mar 2000 16:47:33 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
1790 times
|
| |
|
|
Scott A <s.arthur@hw.ac.uk> wrote in message news:Fs38I5.Dno@lugnet.com...
> > To aid browsing, each news article now carries a rating in the range 0 • (low)
> > to 100 (high).
>
> ...just my opinion
>
> I think the score has little value without knowing how many people have • read
> the post and have chosen not to vote - it could be argued (not by me) that
> these readers should register an automatic 50 score as they did not care
> either way?
I do not rate posts now. I am a beginner. I read in odd pockets of time
as much as I can across the board category wise on a daily basis. Much in
some groups is totally beyond me. I read anyway... I figure if the
concepts I don't understand go in enough times they will eventually clump
together in some sort of order and make sense.
I don't want these registered as a 50. I have made a conscience decision
not to rate . It does not bother me whether others rate or not. Their
business. Maybe rating help some decide what to read. More information
imho is always better.
Rating and knowing how many people have chosen to read a post seems to me
are 2 different things. Rating is a value judgement on content. Number of
people (hits) to a post is something else. Actually a hits # would be more
interesting to me. Maybe this is somehow already included in traffic, I
don't know. As I stated previously, I am still exploring.
I appreciate you putting the argument out here about the auto 50 rating. I
realize you are not arguing for it. (or against it?) It has given us all
something else to think.
Will I choose to rate at some future date? I have no idea... I am
interested in the evolution of this process and will keep reading......
sheree
>
> Furthermore, while I acknowledge the system is still in its early days of
> use, I can't help thinking it is all very subjective. Take this post as an
> example :
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/market/auction/?n=5150
>
> It has a current score of 25 (one vote of nil):
> http://www.lugnet.com/news/rating-graph.cgi?lugnet.market.auction:5150
>
> I can see nothing wrong with it. I can't see why somebody has got worked • up
> to vote nil for it? Additionally, I think quoting anything more than the
> number of votes and the score is distracting.
> ....just my opinion.
>
>
> Scott A
>
>
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New feature: Article rating
|
| (...) (low) (...) ...just my opinion I think the score has little value without knowing how many people have read the post and have chosen not to vote - it could be argued (not by me) that these readers should register an automatic 50 score as they (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
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
|
|
|
|
