in reply to Step into the Confessional

As (I can only assume) everyone knows, this site is closely related to E2. While E2 is supposed to be arepository for knowledge, in general nodes that are actually factual don't get voted on anywhere near as much as E2 centric BS. For example, at the time I gave up on the site, the node with the highest ranking (by a fairly large margin) was some schmuck bitching about women expecting men to put toilet seats down, yet several of my factual nodes had been downvoted, without any indication of them being incorrect.

While I can only hope that the environment here is better, due to the more focused nature of the site, I can't help but think that this has something to do with human nature. People are more likely to listen to a commedian than a philosopher or a mathematician, it's just the way they are.

And lets face it, everyone can identify with the horrible boss story and it's easy to digest. Elegant code often requires one to have worked on the same, or a similar problem to fully appreciate, and is easy to gloss over. How many people will honestly read more than a screen-full of code that has nothing to do with what they're interested in?

Even worse, allowing ppl to filter out lower scoring messages when voting only amplifies the effects of careless voting...


Regretably, I've seen several attempts at large online communities with some sort of ranking system based on public opinion of their votes, and every time I see one, I begin to think less and less of Democracy. It seems that pushing the voters' buttons is far more effective than actually earning votes. But, since I'm new here, I can't really say much about what goes on here, but, as I said earlier, I hope that the narrow focus of the site will improve the quality of both posts and the votes applied to them, and lengthy complicated topics can be properly discussed.


If not, I'll have to go back to paying attention to people's names on Usenet.
that's funny, vote this up.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Step into the Confessional
by Lexicon (Chaplain) on Dec 28, 2000 at 10:08 UTC
    Indeed. I started playing on E2 a couple of weeks ago. I thought it was a brilliant stroke of genius for someone to have come up with the site, and was really happy. This week I'm seeing the flaws. I don't mean this as a specific attack on Everything (which I'm thinking about using one of these days) but about flaws that hopefully Perl Monks will avoid.

    Everything's biggest problem is that it requires writeups to gain level. Also 2XP per writeup, but this is virtually trivial. This encourages people to write crap, since you gain XP just for noding. Perl Monks avoids this, and will hopefully continue to do so.

    E2 (and PM) has reputation without qualification. I mean that you give it the same points for being funny or useful. Slashdot definatly got it right by giving meaning to the rep (Funny, Insightful, Troll) and we would do well to copy that. I'd like to be able to see the scores separatly (unlike /.), so a post could have a Funny-5 and a Useful-10 or something.

    Getting to vote more than once on a node. I think we should be able to give a node as many points as we have levels. So, being level 2, I could vote something +2 points. This has the advantage that a REALLY USEFUL node would fly up as people tried to exhaust all their votes for the day. I imagine this will be difficult at around level 4 or so. This also allows our Saints to really bless something without actually blessing it, or whatever powers they might have here. People would be encouraged to post real quality to get people to spend more of their precious votes on their node.

    This is good even for non-karma-whores. It's just nice to be appreciated. Writing a good node (sorry, I'm in E2 mode) feels good, and having it appreciated is even better. I don't know if this would solve the problem of people spending more votes for funny things or not, but if we separated Funny and Useful (and however many other names) then it would be better. OK, I'll add more as I think of it.

      Disclaimer: I'm writing this ramble here, like you did write it here, because so far I've found PM to be far less hostile than E2. In E2 I'm these days afraid to post a writeup.

      Everybody says it's subjectivity of voting that's the problem. But like some (such as you) say, the real problem is trinary -1/0/+1 voting system. Especially problematic so here in PM, where almost anything is worthy.

      ++ gives XP to writer. -- takes it away. +=0 does nothing. XP is something to strive for. Conclusion: -- what you don't think should have been posted, and ++ what you think makes world somehow better place for having it. Seemingly simple rule, yet, when every script makes world better place, result will be that you ++ every script. Problems: if people do, then rep reflects exposure instead of quality. This is often the case. Other way of dealing with it: people turn the absolute "+ for 'world is better for this post', - for 'world is worse for this post'" rule into sliding scale where you may hit '-' for post that were worthy, simply because they were not worthy enough. Very common, go ask any E2er who downvotes lyrics and you'll hear "they weren't properly formatted". I don't know if this happens here in PM, but I can imagine hitting '--' on good script simply because it did something in nasty way.

      The essence of this auto-scaling is that the +/- thresholds will be shifted until the number of +/0/- are in fair balance. Other effect of this is that different areas will get different scales. If you tell RL stories, the scale will shift to measure the amusement level of story, again hitting '-' on story that was funny, just not funny enough.

      And this all is ...
        ... well, or would be, if it just didn't forget something: author, who has no clue why you -voted, and will quit E2 (like you did), because his good nodes got -voted.

      Conclusion: Factual nodes get "unjust" -votes because the threshold for '-' is lower, because the "hard" rule for factual nodes would result in everything being +'d. This is caused by trinary (is that proper word? never heard, but sounds logical) voting system.

      P.S. This ramble became too E2-oriented but it easily applies to PM. Just s/factual node/script/g; (scripts in E2 don't apply, they get almost solely +votes, apparently because E2 population is so awestruck by the most meager displays of code that '+' is a reflex)

        -Kaatunut