Subject:
|
Re: Creating Lugent Rating Criteria
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 13:45:13 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
1110 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Nicholas Allan writes:
<consider using Relevancy and Quality as dimensions>
Agreed that these are two. I nominated
Newsworthiness
and
Long Term Usefulness
as well.
A post that told us all of a huge and very cheap sale that expires in 5 days
would have a high newsworthiness but a low long term usefulness. So it would
sort to the top of top-post lists, but only for a short while.
Gary Istok posting another magnum opus on the theory of window design isn't
very newsworthy. ( :-) We all know he knows his stuff backwards and forwards,
so it's not news that he comes out with another good one). However it has long
term relevance... what happened in 1968 in Hungarian dealer catalogs is likely
to matter just as much next year as it does tomorrow. So IT would sort to the
top of top-post lists for a long long time.
Here's a new idea:
I would allow the ORIGINATOR of a post that was rated by others as highly long
term relevant to OVERRIDE that rating in the downward direction (not upward,
but downward). Why? Because the originator may well have produced another more
accurate post that supplants it and may want to help newcomers find that one
instead.
In fact, come to think of it, I would allow the ORIGINATOR of posts to
downgrade (but not upgrade) a number of these dimensions. Consider it almost
like cancelling. It's not editing because content isn't being changed, and it's
better than cancelling because the post doesn't go away completely, it just
doesn't sort as high any more.
This notion of downgrading ratings by the originator drives home, conceptually,
that a multidimensional rating scheme is NOT a popularity contest. It's a
usefulness gauge.
Note that I suspect that implementing multidimensional ratings, while an
awesome idea, will require a lot of LDT, EIther the current numbers need to be
ripped out and replaced or something very crufty needs to be done.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Creating Lugent Rating Criteria
|
| (...) Good suggestions. I'd like to flog my personal dead horse here :) and note that it'd be nice to just have ONE button/checkbox for each scale. You'd still end up with continuum of scores, but based on the total number of people who pressed the (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Creating Lugent Rating Criteria
|
| It is clear from the debate raging further down the group (as NNTP newsreaders see it :) ) that one of the fundamental flaws with ratings at the moment is that there is no criteria for ratings posts. This in turn means that the ratings themselves (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
48 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
|
|
|
|
