 | | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) Here BTW is a quick example of a "top N" list (N=40)... (URL) just an experimental page, and it may go away without notice. I'll leave it up for at least a few days, though, for feedback. It's updated once hourly by a cron job. The ratings (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general) !
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating) —Peter White
|
| | | | | (...) I like the top 40, and hope it stays. I was hopefully speaking for others with the 'less time' comment, I myself use the web browser to look for interesting post titles or hop into ng's I have an interest in, I admit to spending hours browsing (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) Any suggestions on a better title than "top 40"? If there wasn't already something called "Spotlight," that might be a good name for it. I'm wary that "top 40" sounds possibly like it's putting things up on a pedestal or too much like the (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) articles are ones expressing dissatisfaction or concern with the rating system.... as the old saying goes, you can vote yourself OUT of a democracy but you can't vote yourself back into one. If the ratings system survives in some form, this (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
