in reply to Re: Congrats to Erudil ... but maybe best nodes should be reviewed
in thread Congrats to Erudil

Perhaps we should add a "best nodes of the year" section, so that the really good nodes have a chance of getting some of the attention they deserve.

Possibly. But I'd rather seem something like a "Hall Of Fame". Any node with a rep higher than say 200 would automatically be added to a special "Hall Of Fame YYYY" node and removed from the "Best nodes". One "Hall Of Fame YYYY" node would exist for each year, with maybe an index node to list all of the years. And such "Hall of Fame YYYY" node would not list by reputation, but by order of publication.

Liz

  • Comment on Re: Re: Congrats to Erudil ... but maybe best nodes should be reviewed

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Congrats to Erudil ... but maybe best nodes should be reviewed
by tilly (Archbishop) on Jan 01, 2004 at 19:30 UTC
    200 feels artificial. Over time the meaning of "200" has changed as the number of potential voters has increased.

    However I would like to see your proposals combined. I think that there is value in adding to the current hall of fame say the best nodes of the last month and last year. And further it would be nice to be able to go back and look at the Hall of Fame at any given week in the past.

    The value of that was brought home to me this Christmas when I first was busy and behind on PM, and then took over a week vacation. There is no way that I could reasonably skim the backlog, and I can't use "Best Nodes" to sample interesting conversations missed if I missed them by more than a week.

    I think that the site has grown to a point where a more intelligent "browsable interesting history" is worthwhile.

[reply]
      200 feels artificial. Over time the meaning of "200" has changed as the number of potential voters has increased.

      Maybe something like this. At the beginning of the year, look ar the rep of the 10 hignest nodes that were posted in the previous year and use the lowest score of that top 10 as the cut-off point.

      And further it would be nice to be able to go back and look at the Hall of Fame at any given week in the past.

      Would be nice, but I'm afraid rather impossible with the current database setup, as that doesn't keep when votes were given (as far as I know).

      Liz

[reply]
        Would be nice, but I'm afraid rather impossible with the current database setup...

        I didn't mean a perfect set of snapshots. I mean being able to see for any given week what posts posted in that week currently have the best ratings. This is far more doable.

        Also by comparing apples to apples (ie comparing posts in the same time period and just grabbing the top few), you get an effect similar to your proposed "Hall of Fame" with simpler rules to implement and a dynamically floating limit. If it is imperfect, well the rating system itself is highly imperfect...

[reply]
      I've found that authorship is a much better indicator of quality of a post than the XP rating. I believe this is a general failure of all everaging methods (slashdot karma is another example of this), and I feel that the promise of recently hyped Social Networking Software is really to localize the reputation computation to the subnet of your choosen friends.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion