Removing rubish votes
-
I just read an article about HTML filtering[^]. Excellent stuff! Especially for people like me who don't work much with HTTP-related topics. But somebody gave the article rating 1 (which really pissed Stephane - and I have full understanding for his anger). What's a point of killing other people's motivation to share their experience? It's also sad that usually only about 1% of people who read articles find it necessary to rate it. I think that rating might discard some "extreme" votes, for example by not counting 10% of lowest and highest ratings in case number of votes is big enough (unfortunately it's usually low - an article viewed by 10,000 people often has only 4-5 votes). Vagif Abilov MCP (Visual C++) Oslo, Norway Hex is for sissies. Real men use binary. And the most hardcore types use only zeros - uppercase zeros and lowercase zeros. Tomasz Sowinski
I voted 4 for the article, but umeca74 made a strong point there: the f***ing language used on the f***ing article is f***ed! And a so f***ing f***ed language can offend some f***ing f***er lamers, so a f***ing lamer voted a f***ing 1. Doubles**t! Q261186 - Computer Randomly Plays Classical Music
-
I just read an article about HTML filtering[^]. Excellent stuff! Especially for people like me who don't work much with HTTP-related topics. But somebody gave the article rating 1 (which really pissed Stephane - and I have full understanding for his anger). What's a point of killing other people's motivation to share their experience? It's also sad that usually only about 1% of people who read articles find it necessary to rate it. I think that rating might discard some "extreme" votes, for example by not counting 10% of lowest and highest ratings in case number of votes is big enough (unfortunately it's usually low - an article viewed by 10,000 people often has only 4-5 votes). Vagif Abilov MCP (Visual C++) Oslo, Norway Hex is for sissies. Real men use binary. And the most hardcore types use only zeros - uppercase zeros and lowercase zeros. Tomasz Sowinski
I've not written anything for a while, but when I do, there are at least two people on CP who immedately give anything I write a '1' by default. To be honest, I don't care. I judge my articles by how many hits they have had, and if people respond with comments and/or questions. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
-
Paul Watson wrote: People are entitled to their opinions, rational or irrational. If we start selectively culling votes then things are just going to get more complicated and piss more people off. Sure, Paul, but for example in figure skating they discard best and worst votes to make results more stable. Still judges suck there too :) So you are basically right. Vagif Abilov MCP (Visual C++) Oslo, Norway Hex is for sissies. Real men use binary. And the most hardcore types use only zeros - uppercase zeros and lowercase zeros. Tomasz Sowinski
Vagif Abilov wrote: but for example in figure skating... Still judges suck there too... LOL exactly. I remember in school we were always taught to chop off the highest and lowest scores when calculating averages. So to cause grief with our teacher we used to always put two extreme scores on either end of the curve :-D I can say with utmost confidence that if there was a reliable, fair, rational, logical and simple of rating articles, Chris Maunder would have implemented it. He is a bright dude and has poked holes in many of our "better rating" schemes :) Anyway I think the comments section is where you get the more accurate and valuable feedback. If an article has a high rating but no good comments, then I am a bit wary of it. If an article has an average rating but good solid comments then I am more receptive to it.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote: Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul Watson
-
Eh Eh. Thanks for the comment. I believe that somebody willing to give a poor-rate, and sure he's allowed to do so, should provide a comment as well. Otherwise, it doesn't improve the article/code. As a general rule, when one or more persons give you a poor rate just minutes or hours after you've released the hot babu, you are a bit disappointed of having spent sweat and time. But that's it. I don't even care poor rates 48 hours later after the work is finished.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant) -
I've not written anything for a while, but when I do, there are at least two people on CP who immedately give anything I write a '1' by default. To be honest, I don't care. I judge my articles by how many hits they have had, and if people respond with comments and/or questions. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
That's nice and you can afford it (a lot of people would recommend what you say as a reference). But saying you don't care is not enough, especially about the article visibility. On the first hand, you know that CP is not searchable at all, which means it's hard to believe people will sort out YOUR article from the unedited reader sections in a deep subsection somewhere. ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ;)). On the other hand, it means that your article is going to be seen throughout either of these : - 10 latest updates - 3-top rated (with a 1-rate, that's not even a question!) - CP news letter Let aside the newsletter, your article is just seen in a very short time, when it's in the "10 latest updates" section. Ironically, depending on the local time you post/update an article, it comes in one of the last entries, not the first!:(( It means, your article is visible a few hours. When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant) -
I just read an article about HTML filtering[^]. Excellent stuff! Especially for people like me who don't work much with HTTP-related topics. But somebody gave the article rating 1 (which really pissed Stephane - and I have full understanding for his anger). What's a point of killing other people's motivation to share their experience? It's also sad that usually only about 1% of people who read articles find it necessary to rate it. I think that rating might discard some "extreme" votes, for example by not counting 10% of lowest and highest ratings in case number of votes is big enough (unfortunately it's usually low - an article viewed by 10,000 people often has only 4-5 votes). Vagif Abilov MCP (Visual C++) Oslo, Norway Hex is for sissies. Real men use binary. And the most hardcore types use only zeros - uppercase zeros and lowercase zeros. Tomasz Sowinski
Everyone's vote should count, however, if someone feels that an article deserves a poor vote, they should at least have the decency to leave a constructive comment. :)
We don't need a thinker! We need a do-er! Someone who will act first, without considering the consequences. - Homer J Simpson
-
That's nice and you can afford it (a lot of people would recommend what you say as a reference). But saying you don't care is not enough, especially about the article visibility. On the first hand, you know that CP is not searchable at all, which means it's hard to believe people will sort out YOUR article from the unedited reader sections in a deep subsection somewhere. ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ;)). On the other hand, it means that your article is going to be seen throughout either of these : - 10 latest updates - 3-top rated (with a 1-rate, that's not even a question!) - CP news letter Let aside the newsletter, your article is just seen in a very short time, when it's in the "10 latest updates" section. Ironically, depending on the local time you post/update an article, it comes in one of the last entries, not the first!:(( It means, your article is visible a few hours. When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant)__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ). The best way I've found to get the articles I need, (apart from going into the section and manually reading through them) - is to use google and type what I'm looking for, usually a CP link with the right stuff pops up. :-D Michael "I've died for a living in the movies and tv. But the hardest thing I'll ever do is watch my leading ladies, Kiss some other guy while I'm bandaging my knee." -- The Unknown Stuntman
-
__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ). The best way I've found to get the articles I need, (apart from going into the section and manually reading through them) - is to use google and type what I'm looking for, usually a CP link with the right stuff pops up. :-D Michael "I've died for a living in the movies and tv. But the hardest thing I'll ever do is watch my leading ladies, Kiss some other guy while I'm bandaging my knee." -- The Unknown Stuntman
True - that's how I found CP in the first place! :cool:
We don't need a thinker! We need a do-er! Someone who will act first, without considering the consequences. - Homer J Simpson
-
That's nice and you can afford it (a lot of people would recommend what you say as a reference). But saying you don't care is not enough, especially about the article visibility. On the first hand, you know that CP is not searchable at all, which means it's hard to believe people will sort out YOUR article from the unedited reader sections in a deep subsection somewhere. ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ;)). On the other hand, it means that your article is going to be seen throughout either of these : - 10 latest updates - 3-top rated (with a 1-rate, that's not even a question!) - CP news letter Let aside the newsletter, your article is just seen in a very short time, when it's in the "10 latest updates" section. Ironically, depending on the local time you post/update an article, it comes in one of the last entries, not the first!:(( It means, your article is visible a few hours. When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant)__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified In practice CP is googlefied, virtually everything is googlefied. Often when I type in programming questions into my Google toolbar the first or second result is a link to an article on CP (though DOTNET247 is also high up on the results list almost every time.) But I do know what you mean, would be nice to have the Google search in CP itself. __Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: On the first hand, you know that CP is not searchable at all, which means it's hard to believe people will sort out YOUR article from the unedited reader sections in a deep subsection somewhere Good articles are moved from the unedited section to the categorised section quite fast IMO. Once categorised I find it easy to find articles to my problems :)
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaRay Cassick wrote: Well I am not female, not gay and I am not Paul Watson
-
That's nice and you can afford it (a lot of people would recommend what you say as a reference). But saying you don't care is not enough, especially about the article visibility. On the first hand, you know that CP is not searchable at all, which means it's hard to believe people will sort out YOUR article from the unedited reader sections in a deep subsection somewhere. ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ;)). On the other hand, it means that your article is going to be seen throughout either of these : - 10 latest updates - 3-top rated (with a 1-rate, that's not even a question!) - CP news letter Let aside the newsletter, your article is just seen in a very short time, when it's in the "10 latest updates" section. Ironically, depending on the local time you post/update an article, it comes in one of the last entries, not the first!:(( It means, your article is visible a few hours. When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant)__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top. To be honest, like I said, I really could give a flying fandango about people who decide to give me a 1. An article proves itself in the long term, by the fact that people keep on reading it. Yes, I agree that searching here could be better, but I suspect most people find what they want by going to sections, which is one reason I don't like unedited articles, they are hard to find. Either way, I write articles to help other people, and if 50 people hate my article, but 5 find it highly useful, that's still a win to me. Ratings also seem to be an indication of sexiness rather than usefulness. I'd consider my STL and iostream articles far more fundamental for any C++ programmer, but they don't rate nearly as highly as my image processing and GDI+ articles. How many people need to sort a container, and how many need to do a blur filter ? I therefore conclude that ratings are not remotely a reflection on how useful an article is. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
-
__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top. To be honest, like I said, I really could give a flying fandango about people who decide to give me a 1. An article proves itself in the long term, by the fact that people keep on reading it. Yes, I agree that searching here could be better, but I suspect most people find what they want by going to sections, which is one reason I don't like unedited articles, they are hard to find. Either way, I write articles to help other people, and if 50 people hate my article, but 5 find it highly useful, that's still a win to me. Ratings also seem to be an indication of sexiness rather than usefulness. I'd consider my STL and iostream articles far more fundamental for any C++ programmer, but they don't rate nearly as highly as my image processing and GDI+ articles. How many people need to sort a container, and how many need to do a blur filter ? I therefore conclude that ratings are not remotely a reflection on how useful an article is. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
Christian Graus wrote: How many people need to sort a container, and how many need to do a blur filter ? Actually, sorting a container with a blur is quite fast.:-D
How low can you go ?
(MS rant) -
Eh Eh. Thanks for the comment. I believe that somebody willing to give a poor-rate, and sure he's allowed to do so, should provide a comment as well. Otherwise, it doesn't improve the article/code. As a general rule, when one or more persons give you a poor rate just minutes or hours after you've released the hot babu, you are a bit disappointed of having spent sweat and time. But that's it. I don't even care poor rates 48 hours later after the work is finished.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant)Perhaps the voting system should be changed so that you *have* to give a comment when you vote. Obviously would probably be best to keep who voted what anonymously, but if the person voting 1 is just being childish, then it's unlikely that they'd be able to come up with a rational critism. As long as the database knows which comment belonged to which post (i.e. anonymous in as far as it doesn't tell us), then it should be straightforward to cancel out the vote (i.e. when the attached post is deleted) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Perhaps the voting system should be changed so that you *have* to give a comment when you vote. Obviously would probably be best to keep who voted what anonymously, but if the person voting 1 is just being childish, then it's unlikely that they'd be able to come up with a rational critism. As long as the database knows which comment belonged to which post (i.e. anonymous in as far as it doesn't tell us), then it should be straightforward to cancel out the vote (i.e. when the attached post is deleted) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote: Perhaps the voting system should be changed so that you *have* to give a comment when you vote. Exactly.;) benjymous wrote: who voted what anonymously You can't. Must be logged to vote. benjymous wrote: then it should be straightforward to cancel out the vote Complex and time-sucking stuff, may be.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant) -
Perhaps the voting system should be changed so that you *have* to give a comment when you vote. Obviously would probably be best to keep who voted what anonymously, but if the person voting 1 is just being childish, then it's unlikely that they'd be able to come up with a rational critism. As long as the database knows which comment belonged to which post (i.e. anonymous in as far as it doesn't tell us), then it should be straightforward to cancel out the vote (i.e. when the attached post is deleted) -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote: Perhaps the voting system should be changed so that you *have* to give a comment when you vote. That is just asking for lots of garble to be entered in. Even if a method was employed to see if it was garble, there wouldn't be much to stop someone from entering meaningless words (even a copy/paste from the article).
James Sig code stolen from David Wulff
-
__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top. To be honest, like I said, I really could give a flying fandango about people who decide to give me a 1. An article proves itself in the long term, by the fact that people keep on reading it. Yes, I agree that searching here could be better, but I suspect most people find what they want by going to sections, which is one reason I don't like unedited articles, they are hard to find. Either way, I write articles to help other people, and if 50 people hate my article, but 5 find it highly useful, that's still a win to me. Ratings also seem to be an indication of sexiness rather than usefulness. I'd consider my STL and iostream articles far more fundamental for any C++ programmer, but they don't rate nearly as highly as my image processing and GDI+ articles. How many people need to sort a container, and how many need to do a blur filter ? I therefore conclude that ratings are not remotely a reflection on how useful an article is. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
Christian Graus wrote: Ratings also seem to be an indication of sexiness rather than usefulness. Very true. The Woah!-effect influences the majority of the votes (grade and the action to vote in the first place). Chris
-
That's nice and you can afford it (a lot of people would recommend what you say as a reference). But saying you don't care is not enough, especially about the article visibility. On the first hand, you know that CP is not searchable at all, which means it's hard to believe people will sort out YOUR article from the unedited reader sections in a deep subsection somewhere. ( for the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified ;)). On the other hand, it means that your article is going to be seen throughout either of these : - 10 latest updates - 3-top rated (with a 1-rate, that's not even a question!) - CP news letter Let aside the newsletter, your article is just seen in a very short time, when it's in the "10 latest updates" section. Ironically, depending on the local time you post/update an article, it comes in one of the last entries, not the first!:(( It means, your article is visible a few hours. When you know this, how the hell would you put sweat and time to write an article at all? And that's at that time rubbish votes come on top.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant)__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified Got tired of complaining about the lack of transaction support in today's OS's?? :P I do agree though; the search is getting hard to use now.
James Sig code stolen from David Wulff
-
benjymous wrote: Perhaps the voting system should be changed so that you *have* to give a comment when you vote. Exactly.;) benjymous wrote: who voted what anonymously You can't. Must be logged to vote. benjymous wrote: then it should be straightforward to cancel out the vote Complex and time-sucking stuff, may be.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant)No, I didn't mean that the actual vote was anonymous to the backend, I meant that it doesn't show who voted what. Either that, or it lists the comments that went with the votes, but doesn't say who said it (unless you purposley check a box to say you don't want to be shown anonymously) As for cancelling out the vote, I didn't mean it'd be done automatically. All that needs doing is to keep track of which post had what vote attached to it, then when the post is deleted, the vote is removed too. That would prevent people from entering random garbage, as a human moderator would instantly be able to see that it wasn't a legit comment. I guess moderators should be able to see what the vote for a comment was, to stop someone writing "very good" as a comment, then voting 1 -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
__Stephane Rodriguez__ wrote: the 40th time this month, I'll keep saying the search engine sucks, and should be googlified Got tired of complaining about the lack of transaction support in today's OS's?? :P I do agree though; the search is getting hard to use now.
James Sig code stolen from David Wulff
James T. Johnson wrote: Got tired of complaining about the lack of transaction support in today's OS's?? Oh my god, someone tracks me now:omg:. May the base tag be with me.
How low can you go ?
(MS rant) -
I just read an article about HTML filtering[^]. Excellent stuff! Especially for people like me who don't work much with HTTP-related topics. But somebody gave the article rating 1 (which really pissed Stephane - and I have full understanding for his anger). What's a point of killing other people's motivation to share their experience? It's also sad that usually only about 1% of people who read articles find it necessary to rate it. I think that rating might discard some "extreme" votes, for example by not counting 10% of lowest and highest ratings in case number of votes is big enough (unfortunately it's usually low - an article viewed by 10,000 people often has only 4-5 votes). Vagif Abilov MCP (Visual C++) Oslo, Norway Hex is for sissies. Real men use binary. And the most hardcore types use only zeros - uppercase zeros and lowercase zeros. Tomasz Sowinski
Poor votes are part of the process. You can't let it bother you. I have given '1's myself for technically flawed articles. I have been the victim of malicious voting. The people who find the article useful don't care about the rating. The people who don't find the article useful don't care either. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.