in reply to RE: RE:(5) Reputation Viewing Option?
in thread Reputation Viewing Option?
I suspected when I typed that that my point would be missed. Knowing that two posts fall in a certain order does not tell you everything you want to know. Replace the above negative numbers with -2 and -5, or whatever low-but-not-too-low nubmers you find adequate. And lets just say that they aren't part of 5, or 7, or 20, or any other large number that makes them irrelevant.
Yet knowing the rep could be harmful.
How? I'll grant you the point of the "snowball" effect, but if you use the suggested method and sacrifice your vote to see rep, it doesn't happen. (The above twisted scenarios with someone with two accounts with voting privileges, one of which is used primarily to snowball, sounds too twisted to really worry about. As someone said, anyone with two voting accounts doesn't need to go through
such hoops to try to skew the system)
Although, I don't think knowing the actual rep number is so useful.
True, a 7 and a 10 don't have much distinction. But now I know that, while a 20 sorted above a 1 doesn't tell me that.
I would suggest adding the sort feature to each page (it is already in the User Settings), deleting posts of -10 (or less) automatically, and maybe even some pretty little icons representing a 'range' of rep next to the posts title. For example, 0-2 have nothing, 3-9 have a star, 10-19 have two stars, 20-29 have three, etc... all -- nodes would have a big unhappy face next to them. Or a image of Mr. Yuk.
So we could jump through all these hoops, including making those star levels relative to account for the vote inflation as PM becomes more popular...or we could just give the "not vote" option, and trust that 70% of our users continue to be reasonable people. I know which makes sense to me.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
RE: RE:(7) Reputation Viewing Option?
by KM (Priest) on Aug 31, 2000 at 00:55 UTC | |
by swiftone (Curate) on Aug 31, 2000 at 17:45 UTC | |
by tilly (Archbishop) on Aug 31, 2000 at 19:00 UTC | |
by KM (Priest) on Aug 31, 2000 at 18:05 UTC | |
by Boogman (Scribe) on Aug 31, 2000 at 01:09 UTC | |
by KM (Priest) on Aug 31, 2000 at 17:12 UTC | |
by swiftone (Curate) on Aug 31, 2000 at 17:31 UTC | |
by KM (Priest) on Aug 31, 2000 at 17:45 UTC | |
|