Vote suggestion. What do you think?
-
Some time ago I have posted a suggestion on how to create a better voting system: Vote for complexity of the article Now each user can vote the quality of an article with a value from 1 to 5. Basically my idea is to add another vote for the complexity of the article. With the complexity I would want to measure many factors: -hours/days of work -argument complexity -innovation -usefulness If for example an article is well written (both text and code) but about a very simple argument I can vote 5 for quality and 2 for the complexity. If otherwise an article is not exceptionally well written (maybe with english errors or with difficult to read code) but about a very advanced and useful argument I can vote 3 for the quality and 5 for the complexity. Just my idea ... What do you think? Davide
-
Some time ago I have posted a suggestion on how to create a better voting system: Vote for complexity of the article Now each user can vote the quality of an article with a value from 1 to 5. Basically my idea is to add another vote for the complexity of the article. With the complexity I would want to measure many factors: -hours/days of work -argument complexity -innovation -usefulness If for example an article is well written (both text and code) but about a very simple argument I can vote 5 for quality and 2 for the complexity. If otherwise an article is not exceptionally well written (maybe with english errors or with difficult to read code) but about a very advanced and useful argument I can vote 3 for the quality and 5 for the complexity. Just my idea ... What do you think? Davide
I voted you 5 for the complexity of your post and 1 for the usefulness = 3 overall.:)
-
Some time ago I have posted a suggestion on how to create a better voting system: Vote for complexity of the article Now each user can vote the quality of an article with a value from 1 to 5. Basically my idea is to add another vote for the complexity of the article. With the complexity I would want to measure many factors: -hours/days of work -argument complexity -innovation -usefulness If for example an article is well written (both text and code) but about a very simple argument I can vote 5 for quality and 2 for the complexity. If otherwise an article is not exceptionally well written (maybe with english errors or with difficult to read code) but about a very advanced and useful argument I can vote 3 for the quality and 5 for the complexity. Just my idea ... What do you think? Davide
If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Mike
Light travels faster than sound. That's why some people appear right until you hear them speak.
-
If it ain't broke, don't fix it! Mike
Light travels faster than sound. That's why some people appear right until you hear them speak.
Mike Hankey wrote:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
And if it is broke, maybe it shouldn't be fixed. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
Mike Hankey wrote:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
And if it is broke, maybe it shouldn't be fixed. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
And if it should, but we don't know how, maybe breaking it more will get those creative juices flowing...
----
i hope you are feeling sleepy for people not calling you by the same.
--BarnaKol on abusive words
Shog9 wrote:
maybe breaking it more will get those creative juices flowing...
Yeah. Maybe we can find an old TV or printer and carry it out to a field and start hammering it with sledgehamers. Maybe tape a little "meme" on it: Code Project Article Voting System. Play some good heavy metal, make a YouTube movie out of it. Sort of like in the movie Office Space. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
Mike Hankey wrote:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
And if it is broke, maybe it shouldn't be fixed. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
Mike Hankey wrote: If it ain't broke, don't fix it! And if it is broke, maybe it shouldn't be fixed.
I guess the wisdom is knowing if the dang things worth the trouble? Mike
Light travels faster than sound. That's why some people appear right until you hear them speak.
-
Shog9 wrote:
maybe breaking it more will get those creative juices flowing...
Yeah. Maybe we can find an old TV or printer and carry it out to a field and start hammering it with sledgehamers. Maybe tape a little "meme" on it: Code Project Article Voting System. Play some good heavy metal, make a YouTube movie out of it. Sort of like in the movie Office Space. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
I voted you 5 for the complexity of your post and 1 for the usefulness = 3 overall.:)
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
complexity of your post
complexity of the thread, rather? :)
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage Tech Gossips
-
Some time ago I have posted a suggestion on how to create a better voting system: Vote for complexity of the article Now each user can vote the quality of an article with a value from 1 to 5. Basically my idea is to add another vote for the complexity of the article. With the complexity I would want to measure many factors: -hours/days of work -argument complexity -innovation -usefulness If for example an article is well written (both text and code) but about a very simple argument I can vote 5 for quality and 2 for the complexity. If otherwise an article is not exceptionally well written (maybe with english errors or with difficult to read code) but about a very advanced and useful argument I can vote 3 for the quality and 5 for the complexity. Just my idea ... What do you think? Davide
I liked your idea, even if they didn't take you seriously. ;)
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
-
I liked your idea, even if they didn't take you seriously. ;)
-------------------------------- "All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing" -- Edmund Burke
The world is not ready for this change :)
-
Some time ago I have posted a suggestion on how to create a better voting system: Vote for complexity of the article Now each user can vote the quality of an article with a value from 1 to 5. Basically my idea is to add another vote for the complexity of the article. With the complexity I would want to measure many factors: -hours/days of work -argument complexity -innovation -usefulness If for example an article is well written (both text and code) but about a very simple argument I can vote 5 for quality and 2 for the complexity. If otherwise an article is not exceptionally well written (maybe with english errors or with difficult to read code) but about a very advanced and useful argument I can vote 3 for the quality and 5 for the complexity. Just my idea ... What do you think? Davide
The author can mark his articles as beginner, intermediate, and advanced. Why do we need a way for users to vote the complexity?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Shog9 wrote:
maybe breaking it more will get those creative juices flowing...
Yeah. Maybe we can find an old TV or printer and carry it out to a field and start hammering it with sledgehamers. Maybe tape a little "meme" on it: Code Project Article Voting System. Play some good heavy metal, make a YouTube movie out of it. Sort of like in the movie Office Space. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh SmithMarc Clifton wrote:
Sort of like in the movie Office Space.
But then you would need to be playing Ice Cube or whatever they were playing when they attacked the fax machine! :rolleyes:
CleaKO
"Now, a man would have opened both gates, driven through and not bothered to close either gate." - Marc Clifton (The Lounge)
-
And if it should, but we don't know how, maybe breaking it more will get those creative juices flowing...
----
i hope you are feeling sleepy for people not calling you by the same.
--BarnaKol on abusive words
Shog9 wrote:
And if it should, but we don't know how, maybe breaking it more will get those creative juices flowing...
Ahhhh, a true programmer...break it to "fix" it. :rolleyes:
CleaKO
"Now, a man would have opened both gates, driven through and not bothered to close either gate." - Marc Clifton (The Lounge)
-
The author can mark his articles as beginner, intermediate, and advanced. Why do we need a way for users to vote the complexity?
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001I'm not very good with english :-O and I find difficult to explain some concepts, anyway I try with a different view: I think that the current vote is perfect to understand if the article is good. If an article has a good vote usually can be used in a production environment, is robust, is well written, ... But... An article can be written without any error, easy to understand, with a very clean code but maybe it is "just" an example on how to use a specific control or class. I appreciate a good author/writer and usually I vote 5 for these kinds of articles and some of these articles are very useful for the community. The problem is that there are also many other article always well written that maybe have required months of work. I think that an author that share a project so complex should be rewarded in some way. Consider also that the same vote is used for the competitions (monthly competition, vista competition, ...). Now I think that in a competition is not right to compare articles so different. It is like comparing Einstein papers with a cookbook. Maybe both are written without errors but the first is a little more "complex". What do you think? Davide
