Subject:
|
Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Apr 2000 20:57:04 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2160 times
|
| |
|
|
Many of my posts have never received any replies or follow-ups, which is quite
depressing. With the current scoring system, at least I know one or two people
have read my post. This often makes me feel better. The actual score is not
that important. (I have never received a high score so far. :-P)
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> The first, original purpose for having ratings was to be able to lay the
> foundation for the later creation of variety of "what's hot" or "top X of
> group Y" listings for quick browsing -- something akin to the current
> Spotlight pages, only fully automated, instantly updating, and much more
> representative of collective opinion. The second original purpose was to
> lay the foundation for so-called "collaborative filtering" possibilities --
> the server learns (could learn) what types of things you prefer to read,
> and gives (could give) higher priority to you personally for messages rated
> higher by people with similar interests. These two main purposes become
> increasingly relevant as message traffic increases.
For this purpose, maybe a simple voting system will do a better job than the
current scoring system.
Just put a checkbox there, meaning "I like this post", and let's see how many
votes each posts get.
Cheers,
Hao-yang Wang
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
