Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Clear questions and runnable code
get the best and fastest answer
 
PerlMonks  

Cast: showing both ++ and --

by ichimunki (Priest)
on Jul 27, 2001 at 03:01 UTC ( [id://100180]=monkdiscuss: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

A recent feature add over at E2 is Cast-- the ability for voters and write-up (aka nodes) authors to see the separate sums of ++ and -- votes on their nodes. Is this feature under consideration for PM, now that it is apparently technically feasible with the E2 engine?

I rather like it over at E2, and think it would be a nice add here. I know that sometimes I've --'ed something, only to be surprised at the high rep it has and I wonder if I'm --'ing in a vacuum (if so, I'd probably be more judicious). And for those for whom --'s are problematic, it would let them more easily see just how bad the problem is (or isn't)...

Edit kudra, 2001-07-28 Added to title (was 'Cast')

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(tye)Re: Cast
by tye (Sage) on Jul 27, 2001 at 11:09 UTC

    This has been proposed before ( what hasn't? (: ), so I'm duty bound to include links to some of the previous discussions of this idea... So please post some links for me because I can't find any. ;)

    My feelings on this idea have gone through the following phases since I first considered it:

    1. Why can't we see how many downvotes each node got??
    2. Darn, being able to see downvotes would probably lead to more people getting their feelings hurt more often.
    3. Oh, I don't care about other peoples' feelings; I just occasionally really want to know what the spread is on a node.
    4. Oh my word! It has been quiet for a while, but we sure used to get plenty of whining about "Oh, my node has a rep of -1! I'm so emotional about it!". I don't think I could stand the flood of "Oh, my node got downvoted!" wailing that this feature is likely to generate!

    Let me elaborate on that last point some... There have already been several times that people complained about being able to tell that a node of theirs was getting downvoted even though it had a positive reputation.

    If everyone could tell this about all of their nodes without having to pay close attention, the huge increase in number of observances has got to mean that there would be a huge increase in the chances of someone (lacking the emotional stability to deal with the thought of some people anonymously expressing displeasure with something that they had written) going off on an emotional tirade about how terrible this is. And for some reason, I'm really sick of those.

    So my current stance is that I'm completely dead set against the idea. And that's final!

    But you intrigue with your vagueness. How does this feature work? The name, "Cast--", and parts of your description give me the impression that perhaps this isn't just the wide-open revealing of the number of ++ and number of -- votes on any node for which you could see the reputation. Perhaps you are only allowed to pick certain nodes that you are especially curious about?

    No! You can't lure me in that easily. I don't want to know!

            - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
          i disagree, on similar points as the prior post. I think seeing the down votes would give the post author some feeling as to if this sort of post is a good choice (appropriate, useless, why ever people down votes nodes). I think anyone willing to complain that they have --'s on a node with this feature would already be in the CB complaining because they have been stalking around keeping track of every posts change all through the day.
          <overly_extreme>So, why hide information from people to protect them ... scrap to open source/free speach ethic and hide it all from the fools ... Muahahahahah;</overly_extreme>
      update:fixed spelling error
      Thus spake the Master Programmer:
      "When you have learned to snatch the error code from the trap frame, it will be time for you to leave."
      -- The Tao of Programming

        I'll grant that there are a few people who have developed a "problem" with downvotes and already monitor for them and then complain about them. And such people have a higher rate of "complaints about downvotes" per monk, but they currently only account for about half (by my informal count) of the complaints about downvotes.

        The other half of complaints come from people when they encounter the downvote for the first time or nearly so. This is the area where I think this change would cause the number of complaints to skyrocket.

        One thought that crossed my mind that I didn't mention was a "test" you had to pass before you could see counts of downvotes. The test would involve reading a big disclaimer about how noone wants to hear you whining about getting downvotes and so, before this feature can be enabled, you have to promise to never, ever whine/complain/discuss about downvotes (in nodes or chatter). Ever! And then there'd be a some questions to answer to ensure that you got the message. Though I think this could help counteract the increase in complaints, I still think the net result would be more complaints.

        As for your last paragraph, you seem to be addressing stage 2. I've move waaaaay beyond that. I don't want to protect people. I could care less if they get their feelings hurt from downvotes (I blame having to listen to the complaints for my new, callous attitude). People keep saying that the XP don't matter but then they complain when they get a few downvotes. It's all a big game, and if there is one thing that is true about games, if you play, then you gotta expect to lose sometimes.

                - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
      Tye, the feature is just called "Cast" over at E2, which is why I called it that here. It simply shows the sum of all of the votes cast as ++ or --. The people there seem to like it, but mostly because the nodes on E2 are more likely to receive downvotes than they are here and it seems to amuse some noders to find that they have nodes with +85/-81 for a total rep of 4. This indicates a different sort of success in some views than a simple +76 would.

      I mostly bring up the discussion because I, as a voter, moreso than a recipient of votes, would like to see if I'm the only downvoter in those rare cases where I do check the -- button. While I can't retract that vote, I would like to know I'm not the only one downvoting.

      Your concerns about the recipients of downvoting complaining even more than they do are certainly valid concerns. I, now, have the same concerns. However, if this were a level power, maybe level 3 or 4, that should keep everyone but mmmph! and mmnmmph! from complaining about "personality" voting.
      The whole business of being anonymously boo'd is foreign to us.  (So is being anonymously applauded, but somehow we think it's more familiar.)  In one of the most recent discussions someone came up with the phrase:

      Remember the experience, forget the points.

      or something fairly close.  I just spent half an hour looking and can't find it (I'm sure it was within the last 30 days.)
      Anyway, maybe the next time, this becomes a major disturbance we can all put something like that in our sigs for a day or two.  And whether or not this suggestion is implememnted, it will come up again sometime soon.

        p

Re: Cast
by petral (Curate) on Jul 27, 2001 at 04:16 UTC
    ++ 1

    It seems to me this does even more than that.  Most importantly, it goes a long way toward aleviating the effects of the apparent "personality voting" (going through and --'ing all the posts of one person), by at least causing theses votes to be rather obvious.  For instance, Zaxo sat and watched 20 of his posts get downvoted in 10 minutes.  If he hadn't happenned to notice while it was happenning, he could have come by a day or two later and simply thought he had had that much less response.

    But more generally, for a post which has, say, 0 votes, it allows one to know if there was no interest at all or if 91 people loved it and 91 people hated it.  That's a huge amount of information which is entirely unavailable now.

    (Of course, I have to add, lest someone take issue, that 91++ and 91-- is an extreme and unlikely example and that 0 is more likely the result of nothing.)

      p

Re: Cast
by hsmyers (Canon) on Jul 27, 2001 at 17:56 UTC

    It just occurred to me that if this were somehow tied to an individuals rank/standing in the monastery, this might eliminate the tender ego(tm) problem.

    As for myself, I almost always prefer more information rather than less, so I would certainly be in favor of this kind of addition.

    hsm
(zdog) Re: Cast: showing both ++ and --
by zdog (Priest) on Jul 29, 2001 at 06:15 UTC
    As far as the idea, I wouldn't mind seeing it. You could get some interesting results.

    But I have a few technical issues that I want to get off my chest. First, there is no E2 engine, there is an Everything engine produced by EDC and both PM and E2 are run by it as well as several other sites.

    Secondly, anything that can be done with Perl and a MySQL database is feasable with the Everything engine practically. PM runs on 0.8 and has no plans of upgrading in the near future according to vroom. The real difference as far as I know lies in the internals of the Everything engine versions.

    Therefore, something like this is definitely possible, but this does not necessarily mean it is been under consideration until maybe now.

    Also, I don't want to sound like I'm coming down on you hard for not having a few facts straight, I just want to let you know for future reference.

    Update: tye has pointed out to me that the real problem being discussed is whether or not previous votes can be deduced to suit this system. Probably not, but it can be done so that posts previously just show the amount positive or negative (i.e. if an old post is rep 13 then is would be 13 ++'s and 0 --'s, and the same would be done if the rep was negative, except those would appear in the -- column). However, to clarify, my post was discussing the question:

    Is this feature under consideration for PM, now that it is apparently technically feasible with the E2 engine?

    I'm sorry if I had misunderstood the author's purpose.

    Zenon Zabinski | zdog | zdog7@hotmail.com

Re: Cast: showing both ++ and --
by jlongino (Parson) on Jul 29, 2001 at 20:18 UTC
    I think the idea has great merit. If you consider What Perl Monks is, How can a person improve their skills (not just Perl skills but also writing and communication skills) without feedback? Is a -- vote feedback? Only if you know that you received one.

    On a related issue, I would like to offer my opinions on the potential misuse of -- voting in ways that detract from the spirit of the site.

    Individuals that -- more than they ++ do so out of laziness, vindictiveness, or jealousy. It's far more difficult to find "worthy" nodes to ++. At the time of this post I'm an acolyte and have a difficult time finding eight "worthy" nodes to upvote each day. It is not a task I take lightly. Instead of spending an average of 60-90 minutes browsing my favorite sections (SOPW, Meditations and PMD), I could easily go to SOPW and cast eight --'s in less than 30 seconds. Does this serve the site in any positive way?

    As a rule of thumb:

    • I downvote nodes that strike me as mean spirited or negative.
    • If the usefulness of a given node is not apparent to me, I leave it to individuals better qualified to make a determination.
    • If I think a node contains bad information or I disagree with it in principle, I repy to it and try to offer something useful.
    • If a post is unintelligible or vague, I ask for clarification.
    I suppose that what I'm getting at is that the XP system currently in place offers more "rewards" to those that downvote. There is no stigma attached.

    My suggestion is that a simple ++/-- vote ratio be kept and updated weekly on each individual. Call it a Positivity Ratio (PR). This ratio could be viewed at each individual's home node.

    "Resolve to do something useful, honorable, dutiful, and do it heartily." --Frelinghuysen.

Re: Cast: showing both ++ and --
by Anonymous Monk on Aug 01, 2001 at 13:52 UTC
    This is not going to happen.

    It has been discussed before, and it came out that for all the nodes so far, there is only an XP field, which gets updated along the lines of $xp += 1 || -1;.

    Furthermore, adding this "feature" after a hundred thousand nodes leavs a hudred thousand nodes in the "dark", and I don't like that, among other people.

    Anyway, it's not really that important, at least not as a feature.

      The 100,000+ nodes could only be treated as per zdog above. That doesn't seem like a reason in itself not to do it in the future.

        p

      ... I don't like that, among other people.
      So, some anonymous people don't like it. To paraphrase your reason: "we've always done it this way, so we don't want to change it."

      True, but is there a good reason for not changing it? It seems there is a great deal of interest in the feature along with a neutral (0?) vote. Their presence will change the "atmosphere" of the site. The question is will it be for the better? While we can't know for sure unless it happens, I think it's worth finding out. If it turns out to be a disaster, the votes can be agrregated and we're back to where we are now. Plus we will have learned something; maybe how to do it better.

      Have fun,
      Carl Forde

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://100180]
Approved by root
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others studying the Monastery: (4)
As of 2024-03-29 12:21 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found