Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Apr 2000 18:43:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2160 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
(Some snipping here, read Todd's post)
> Specific personal questions:
> 1. ... the ratings were not displayed to you unless you specifically requested
> (via some simple setting) that they be displayed to you?
>
> 2. ...the numeric values of the ratings were not displayed ever to anyone but
> collected and used by the server only...
I think a combination of these could work well. The ratings could be hidden
from public view, so that noone feels like they are being punished, and the
server could still use the numbers. I'd like to still have the link to the
Distribution of Input page. That way, curious users could see how that article
is being rated. I think that this would work better than a personal setting to
make ratings visible.
I support ratings because of the possibilities that they allow (for searching,
hot topics, etc). However, we have a natural tendency to feel bad when our
opinions aren't considered to be as great as those of others. Getting rid of
ratings all together would help morale, but I personally think that we'd be
losing more than we'd be (re)gaining.
> 3. How would you feel (better or worse) if the ratings were not even
> collected and collated in the first place? (i.e. the destruction of the
> feature altogether)
Because I know what good the ratings could be used for, I'd feel worse.
> 4. Have you ever felt victimized by the rating system?
Fortunately, no. (Perhaps not yet)
> 5. Have you ever felt victimized indirectly by seeing someone else's post
> get a high rating? How often?
No, but Larry's theory that certain people mark him down automatically makes me
uncomfortable. I hope that doesn't really happen, but if it does, it's bad.
> 6. Do you feel that the article rating system makes it easier for you or
> harder for you to share your ideas?
Not at all. Though, I can see how it would for some.
> 7. How does your initial reaction to the announcement of the article rating
> system compare to your current opinion of it?
I was initially upset because I sent my membership money in too late and was
missing out. :) Now, I'm a full member that rates 90% of the messages that I
read. It seems to me that people are getting upset over numbers that don't
actually do anything yet, so I'm currently nervous about what will happen
in the community when features based on ratings appear.
> 8. Do you feel that it is too early, too late, or the right time to address
> these issues?
Perfect timing. If it had been done before, no one would know what to
think. If we'd waited, some people might have left.
> 9. What other areas (besides news articles) can you imagine that a
> collaborative ratings system would be most helpful to you? LEGO sets?
> Websites? Individual web pages? etc...
Lego sets definately! I'd like to see an overall rating for a thread
(though that's more of a use of the current ratings). Theme ratings could
work, though does it really help anyone to know that we all liked classic
space? :) I think that web site ratings would cause more of a problem than
article ratings currently do.
I think I just wrote my longest Lugnet message yet. :)
Ben Roller
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
