 | | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
|
(...) That's what the averaging effect is for -- to smooth that out. If the system also could learn what you liked, you might find that helpful. (That's a long way down the road, though.) (...) Will you still feel that way when there are 4x the (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
|
(...) Smoothing what out, though? How does the system distinguish between "0: I like posts about robots, but not in .castle" and "0: not interesting to me", or "60: kinda funny if you're in the right mood" and "60: contains some useful information (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
|
(...) Well- yeah. But at the current amounts of rating (most posts get no more than two ratings) the averaging effect doesn't smooth much out. I totally forgot to mention in my long post that I actually stopped regarding a rating of a post as a (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
|
(...) It can't (and doesn't actually need to) distinguish that so greatly -- the bottom line (to it) would be that you disfavor posts about robots in castle and things that are kinda funny or contain some useful info. (...) I'm very skeptical about (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Opinions wanted: article rating harmful? (was: New feature: Article rating)
|
|
(...) Whoops -- :) -- I meant to say, "...that you disfavor posts about robots in castle and _favor_ (somewhat) things that are kinda funny or contain some useful info." But actually it would just look at the statistical correlation between your (...) (25 years ago, 26-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
