Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
746 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, AZPaul3, dwise1, nwr, PaulK, Tanypteryx (6 members, 740 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,203 Year: 6,315/6,534 Month: 508/650 Week: 46/232 Day: 23/23 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   New Feature: Message Rating System
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 55 of 258 (574876)
08-18-2010 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by RAZD
08-16-2010 8:00 PM


Re: positive rating only avoids problems
RAZD writes:
positive rating only avoids problems

I participate in two forums that have a "positive rating only" system. In both, it is a binary rating. All you can do is give a vote of approval.

In forum A, the vote is public for all to see.
In forum B, the vote is private and seen only by the author of the approved post.

In both cases, the identity of the voter is made available to whoever sees the vote.

Both of these actually work, though in different ways.

It quickly becomes clear in forum A, that the public vote is being used as a public statement, typically an approval of the content (but not necessarily the writing style) of the post.

At forum B it is a bit harder to assess, but it mostly seems to be used as a private way of thanking people for particularly good posts, and often this has as much to do with style as with content.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by RAZD, posted 08-16-2010 8:00 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by RAZD, posted 08-18-2010 6:54 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 62 of 258 (577888)
08-30-2010 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by RAZD
08-30-2010 8:42 PM


Re: Tram getting "1" message ratings -- make that the default rating
RAZD writes:
Except people mark a post 1 because they don't like what it says, regardless of how well written or on topic it is, and mark posts a 5 because they like what it says, regardless of how off topic it is and how much it fails to address the issue/s.

That seems to be a rather sweeping generalization.

I give a message a 5 if it is unusually well written and well argued. Admittedly, I am not as likely to think a message well argued if it has a seriously wrong conclusion. But it isn't the conclusion that I am rating on.

I don't actually rate very many messages.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by RAZD, posted 08-30-2010 8:42 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 96 of 258 (633015)
09-12-2011 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by RAZD
09-11-2011 11:57 PM


Re: Kudos for cheers and jeers ... but
People will still vote as they want to vote. I don't think it is worth all of the programming trouble to make the changes you suggest.

Personally, I give a "+" mainly for exceptioinally well written posts or posts with exceptionally important content. And I give a "-" mostly for posts that are incoherent or that contain abusive language.

There's one exception to the above that I am experimenting with. And that's for posts in PNT. For a PNT post, I give a "+" for "please promote - this is an interesting topic" and a "-" for "I see this as a topic not worthy of promotion."


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by RAZD, posted 09-11-2011 11:57 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2011 10:16 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


(3)
Message 99 of 258 (659318)
04-14-2012 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Kairyu
04-14-2012 5:20 PM


Re: jeers
Kairyu writes:
While a cheer as a sign of approval holds some merit, what do jeers have?

I rarely jeer a message based on content alone.

I do occasionally jeer messages for being nasty and mean-spirited. And I do sometimes jeer messages for being incoherent.

I sometimes jeer PNT posts, as a hint that I don't think this PNT warrants approval.

It seems to me that if jeers are used intelligently, then they can be useful.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Kairyu, posted 04-14-2012 5:20 PM Kairyu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Trixie, posted 04-15-2012 10:13 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 113 of 258 (714536)
12-23-2013 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Tanypteryx
12-23-2013 11:05 AM


Re: No Jeers
I apologize for screwing it up for everyone else.

I don't have a problem with the way you have participated. No apology needed IMO. (I disagree with the part of Admin's comment that you quoted).

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-23-2013 11:05 AM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 119 of 258 (714602)
12-24-2013 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Admin
12-24-2013 8:45 AM


Re: No Jeers
No apology necessary, it wasn't your fault, Adminnemooseus just thought the message ratings needed to be reined back.

Is this the place to express my disagreement with Adminnemooseus? I thought the cheers and jeers were working very well. Now we are going to miss those red markers from Faith and others.


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Admin, posted 12-24-2013 8:45 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Admin, posted 12-25-2013 8:01 AM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 127 of 258 (714655)
12-25-2013 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Admin
12-25-2013 8:01 AM


Re: No Jeers
It looks like your voice has been heard.

Thanks to whoever changed it back.

And a Merry Christmas to everybody, including those who give me jeers.


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Admin, posted 12-25-2013 8:01 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6038
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.9


(5)
Message 153 of 258 (715662)
01-08-2014 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by Adminnemooseus
01-07-2014 10:29 PM


Re: Ideally, a (+) for a very good message, a (-) for a very bad message
Adminnemooseus writes:
This is NOT at all how I saw you using the (+)/(-) system. Instead, you seemed to just give most to all of the evolution side messages a (+) and most to all of the creationist side messages a (-). Which, to me, was nothing much more than you being a jerk (OSLT).

I disagree, and I consider that an unfair analysis.

You are taking the ID viewpoint: the feature was designed by an intelligent agent, and its purpose comes from the intentions of the designer.

I prefer the evolution viewpoint: the feature evolved through a process of trial and error, and it gets its purpose from the way that it is being used.

It has turned out that the way it is used varies. But that's hardly surprising.

Some people have been using the "cheer" for "I agree" and the jeer for "I disagree". Wouldn't the "jerk" designation be more appropriate for somebody who posted a reply "I agree" or a reply "I disagree" to just about every message?

People have adapted to using the cheer/jeer system as a form of communication. People vary in how they use it, as with any system of communication.

My suggestion: put back the jeer button, and embrace the way that people are actually using the system.


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-07-2014 10:29 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by Theodoric, posted 01-08-2014 8:36 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022