Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl: the Markov chain saw
 
PerlMonks  

Re: RFC: Better Best Answers

by ww (Archbishop)
on Sep 13, 2016 at 12:25 UTC ( [id://1171662]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RFC: Better Best Answers

Thank you for the thoughts and for soliciting opinions/suggestions/whatever. You do yoeman work here and that gives you special creds for suggesting improvements.

That said, perhaps there's a way to allow Level 11 monks (and up) to RECOMMEND at node for "good" labeling but to keep that recommendation viewable ONLY BY the Q&A Editors and Gods. My reasoning is similar to that offered by Discipulus: If (and I'm not certain that this is the case; just suspicious) the best nodes list attracts votes to its members surely a public "good" flagging would do likewise or maybe even more so.

And while the "extra votes" incentive notion has many merits (think how many times we see comments along the line of "I'd upvote this again if I could....") enacting it would surely skew (against!) the rankings of older-but-still-excellent nodes which are no longer attracting active general attention. OTOH, maybe we would give level-11 Monks the opportunity to upvote a node twice, within their current allocation of votes for the price of writing a node with that comment PLUS an explanation of why the reply to which the comment in addressed is so deserving.

Re Beech's suggestion (above) on tags/keywords: I'm inclined to agree with Tye's remark at Re: Keyword Nodelet / Tagging documentation (vote > privilege)):

" My experience with PM leads me to believe that voting has a much better chance of resulting in a useful categorization system than privilege (the tag adders, tag deleters, and considerers) does.
" My bet is that privilege won't result in a very useful tag system and, even if it starts to, the effect won't last."

Again, thanks for your work to improve PM.

Come, let us reason together: Spirit of the Monastery

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: Better Best Answers
by jdporter (Paladin) on Sep 13, 2016 at 14:59 UTC
    think how many times we see comments along the line of "I'd upvote this again if I could...."

    Precisely. That was certainly a factor in my thinking.

    ... enacting it would surely skew (against!) the rankings of older-but-still-excellent nodes ...

    If site participation were as great or greater than in the olden days, I'd agree with you; but as was recently brought up, participation in the site is waning, and commensurately the number of votes cast. Indeed, part of my reason for thinking it would be nice to dole out more votes to the active members is to mitigate, at least a little bit, the disadvantage that more recent nodes have against older nodes.

    a way to allow Level 11 monks (and up) to RECOMMEND at node for "good" labeling...

    That's certainly an idea... But it introduces a new mechanic, a second kind of vote, which is the kind of complexity increase I'd like to avoid. On the other hand, QandAEditors can easily see which replies to a question have the highest popular estimation, simply by selecting "Note Ordering: Best First" in User Settings.

    If the best nodes list attracts votes to its members surely a public "good" flagging would do likewise or maybe even more so.

    Yeah; I don't see that as a problem. Think about how the Categorized Questions and Answers section works now. It highlights "good" posts in just the same way.

    Now one thing I want to clarify: These two mechanics — letting people give good nodes more than one upvote, and letting special deputies mark some nodes as "good" — would be independent. The former is mob-sourced approbation, essentially; the latter is elitist control. I envision (and again, I wouldn't expect any mechanical enforcement to be necessary) that the QandAEditors would generally not mark any question as "good" until is has been around a while. That is to say, they wouldn't go through today's/yesterday's new SoPW looking for questions to put their stamp on.

    I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
      "If site participation were as great or greater than in the olden days, I'd agree with you; but as was recently brought up, participation in the site is waning, and commensurately the number of votes cast. Indeed, part of my reason for thinking it would be nice to dole out more votes to the active members is to mitigate, at least a little bit, the disadvantage that more recent nodes have against older nodes."

      That's certainly valid, and probably constitutes an incontestable answer to my concerns; one that obviates those concerns. But, FTR, I'm not completely "comfy" with the notion of extra votes as early as Level 11: that's a status that can probably be obtained in just a few weeks by an XP whore.

      And the balance of "crowd sourced approbation" with some "elitist control" is a very strong plus for your idea. Again, thank you!


      Quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Juvenal, Satires

        Would it help if extra votes are handed out only if monks at a certain level have X number of total posts with at least 25% of them 10++ (these are arbitrary numbers just as an example), if such a thing is even feasible? Or, the number of extra votes handed out is based on some statistic like above?

        update... or perhaps even the votes get doled out after monk with < X level receives this special voting on X number of their own posts?

Re^2: RFC: Better Best Answers (vote when out of votes)
by beech (Parson) on Sep 15, 2016 at 02:17 UTC

    Hi,

    Re Beech's suggestion (above) on tags/keywords: I'm inclined to agree with Tye's remark at Re: Keyword Nodelet / Tagging documentation (vote > privilege))

    :)

    I think what I'm really suggesting is buttons,

    like a root node has a [mark as good faq question]

    and a reply has a [mark as good answer]

    I don't think I care too much if that results in some kind of tag/keyword in keyword nodelet, or a "good" flag"

    or simply a  +=2 upvote

    What I do care, is that its a button, that its always available for me to click it, even if I'm out of votes for the day

    vote when out of votes for "good questions" and "best answers" with buttons

      I think what I'm really suggesting is buttons,

      like a root node has a [mark as good faq question]

      and a reply has a [mark as good answer]

      ...

      What I do care, is that its a button, that its always available for me to click it, even if I'm out of votes for the day

      Ah! You have described what I'm envisioning the QandAEditors will be able to do!

      It would be a two stage process: (1) rank-and-file monks increase the rep of good nodes with extra votes; (2) QandAEditors attach special flags to "faqish" questions and "best" answers. I'm afraid you might have gotten the two mixed up a little.

      Thank you!

      I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1171662]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (5)
As of 2024-03-28 18:36 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found