Subject:
|
Re: Just look what ratings did to Slashdot!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 02:44:26 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm.orgSTOPSPAMMERS
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
867 times
|
| |
|
|
Chris Busse <cbusse@infi.net> wrote:
> They have a system in place where more senior/active users are assigned a
> given number of points to moderate forum posts up or down, as well as bestow
> adjectives like "Interesting" or "Insightful" to the posts each day.
I think you've got the details right, but I'd disgree with your assessment
of the result. I'd say that slashdot's moderation system has been quite
successful. In the early days, /. was fun to read and had good discussions.
But when it passed a certain critical mass, the signal to noise ratio
imploded. I didn't even bother to read the comments anymore.
The moderation system isn't perfect, but it now means that when I browse at
+2 or +3, I actually see a lot of signal.
> further their personal agendas, effectively acting as censors against those
> who share views they do not agree with (ie. Anyone saying that a given
> Microsoft technology is superior to a Linux technology.)
I've actually seen a number of posts with high scores which say that
something from microsoft is decent. It's usually the ones that say so
without justification which get moderated down -- and let's face it, given
the audience, that's fair. (It'd be like me coming in here and saying
"Megabloks makes much better blocks than Lego" -- just asking for trouble.)
But, the point of slashdot's system is very different from what Todd wanted.
They were having a severe problem with noise. Here, we've got a lot of
signal, and Todd just wants to highlight the best. That may ask for a
different solution.
You may have missed my "two button" proposal in all of the current noise :)
so I'll repeat it. I'd like to see Todd's fancy cool geek stuff stripped
down to two buttons: "This post is exceptional" and "This post is
off-topic". In fact, if people prefer, I'd even do without the second one.
I think this would make the purpose of the system a lot more clear, and
actually work better -- usability studies (which I'm quoting third-hand
here) have shown that having more options on a scale is bad. (5 being about
the max.)
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
Boston University Linux ---> http://linux.bu.edu/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Just look what ratings did to Slashdot!
|
| (...) That sounds like an excellent idea, but how would the votes be tallied? ie: 21-Apr-00 03:25 [5/1] Re: Check out this set! — John Doe where 5 = the number of yes this is exceptional votes, and 1 = the number of this is OT votes? (my apologies (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Just look what ratings did to Slashdot!
|
| While I'm not particularly interested in directly weighing in on the debate raging over Lugnet's rating system, I will take the time to say this: Look carefully at how rating (they call it Moderation) has affected the Slashdot community. ((URL) I (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
