Subject:
|
Re: Creating Lugent Rating Criteria
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Apr 2000 15:00:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1561 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> Richard Franks <spontificus@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It does have some benefits - how would the "off-topic" button work though if
> > the message was cross-posted, and assuming that it wasn't off-topic in every
> > group? Also - that is a problem with any cross-posted message - it might be
> > great in one group, but not in another - there are quite a few examples of • this
> > already!
>
> Yes, that's a point I hadn't thought of. Hmm. Since having the off-topic
> score is really important to this whole concept, it might have to be kept
> seperately for each group the message was posted in. Yuck. (But that's also
> a problem with the current system.)
Well, I'm no computer whiz but it doesn't seem like it'd too hard. After all,
on the page after you post there are links to every group you posted in, and
those are created on the fly, isn't that so? ...so how hard is it to create
the o-t part of the rating on the fly, with a checkbox next to each group?
(I'm not trying to be annoying, I'm really asking how hard is it.)
> > Also - if you like the message, do you rate it? Or do you only rate messages
> > that you REALLY REALLY like? This one might actually work itself out - not
> > everybody will rate the latest pirate jungle, but a lot more people will rate
> > the latest news from LD, thereby giving it greater prominance. But it is
> > perhaps best not to assume that it would work that way, eithout further
> > consideration?
I agree with Matthew - that's definitely how it'd work out. I don't see any
other aspects that could come up.
> - having to put less thought into weighing exactly how much each message
> is "worth" makes the process less tedious, and therefore something more
> people are more likely to do.
Right!
> - with the current system a there's not much of a way to tell the
> difference between a message two people liked a lot and one 100 people
> liked a little bit.
> - I actually think that a large number of people wouldn't make use of the
> scale anyway. Since scoring articles means going out of my way, I only
> bother to do it if I think it's something people _really_ should see and
> I rate it 100.
I usually only rate 100s as well. And it seems like a lot of people do that.
I've seen so many posts that are slowly climbing to the maximum possible for
that number of ratings (meaning they only get 100 scores). So why not just
make it an "all or nothing" rating? Either it's newsworthy or it's not, either
off-topic or not. No need to say by how much it's off topic, or how newsworthy
it is; that can be decided by how many people rate it.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Creating Lugent Rating Criteria
|
| (...) the problem I think isn't in generating the page, but in storing the information. Right now, each message has only one set of ratings to keep track of... kinda like one rating file per message. But if you have to keep track of the rating in (...) (25 years ago, 21-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Creating Lugent Rating Criteria
|
| (...) Yes, that's a point I hadn't thought of. Hmm. Since having the off-topic score is really important to this whole concept, it might have to be kept seperately for each group the message was posted in. Yuck. (But that's also a problem with the (...) (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
|
|
|
|
