[Request] Make 4 votes on articles non-anonymous too?
-
It's nice getting a 4. I want to encourage members to give 4 (and 5!) for great articles. If an article is poor then it helps those looking to sort the wheat from the chaff to get a lower vote (since it means we can provide a x/5 score, instead of just a # upvotes, which is impossible to compare relatively). However, downvotes mean something's wrong, and the entire purpose of CodeProject is to help devs learn, so by forcing a comment on a downvote you are helping explain the issue. Saying something's great doesn't require an explanation.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
I'm with Nish on this. 4 has become the new 1, and isn't being used to say an article is great - it's just there to get stuff off the top of the "latest best picks" list, which is counter productive. If an article is great, then a comment saying why you think it's not quite worthy of a 5 should be the least you can do.
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
I'm with Nish on this. 4 has become the new 1, and isn't being used to say an article is great - it's just there to get stuff off the top of the "latest best picks" list, which is counter productive. If an article is great, then a comment saying why you think it's not quite worthy of a 5 should be the least you can do.
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
Interesting. I shall tinker.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I'm with Nish on this. 4 has become the new 1, and isn't being used to say an article is great - it's just there to get stuff off the top of the "latest best picks" list, which is counter productive. If an article is great, then a comment saying why you think it's not quite worthy of a 5 should be the least you can do.
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
I'm with Nish on this. 4 has become the new 1
Thank you. 4 is indeed the new 1. And 4s are most often cast by *gasp* Platinum authors.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
Interesting. I shall tinker.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Awesome! :thumbsup:
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
I'm with Nish on this. 4 has become the new 1, and isn't being used to say an article is great - it's just there to get stuff off the top of the "latest best picks" list, which is counter productive. If an article is great, then a comment saying why you think it's not quite worthy of a 5 should be the least you can do.
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
IMO article votes should always be non-anonymous and invite to comment. That is the way to provide an honnest voting system; as long as voting different scores takes different amounts of effort, or has different side-effects, the voting system is biasing the results; which obviously it shouldn't. Now if 4 were non-anonymous and 5 were still anonymous, we would probably see fewer 4's and more 5's for the same article, effectively compressing the scale even further than it is already. A very bad idea. I never understood why anonymous article votes should be possible; is there anything wrong in saying you liked or disliked an article? If we can store all the rep stuff, adding one message (if there isn't one already) to each article vote won't swamp the disks, will it? :confused:
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
-
IMO article votes should always be non-anonymous and invite to comment. That is the way to provide an honnest voting system; as long as voting different scores takes different amounts of effort, or has different side-effects, the voting system is biasing the results; which obviously it shouldn't. Now if 4 were non-anonymous and 5 were still anonymous, we would probably see fewer 4's and more 5's for the same article, effectively compressing the scale even further than it is already. A very bad idea. I never understood why anonymous article votes should be possible; is there anything wrong in saying you liked or disliked an article? If we can store all the rep stuff, adding one message (if there isn't one already) to each article vote won't swamp the disks, will it? :confused:
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Luc Pattyn wrote:
IMO article votes should always be non-anonymous
That's basically what I am suggesting here. wasn't that clear from the original message?
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
Interesting. I shall tinker.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Awesome mate. Simply awesome.:thumbsup:
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
Luc Pattyn wrote:
IMO article votes should always be non-anonymous
That's basically what I am suggesting here. wasn't that clear from the original message?
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
wasn't that clear from the original message?
No it wasn't, at least not to me. The subject line says 4, not 4 and 5. So does the message. Changing how 4 works without changing 5 would be very bad, changing both to mimic the behavior of the system when voting 1,2, or 3 would be good. :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
wasn't that clear from the original message?
No it wasn't, at least not to me. The subject line says 4, not 4 and 5. So does the message. Changing how 4 works without changing 5 would be very bad, changing both to mimic the behavior of the system when voting 1,2, or 3 would be good. :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Luc Pattyn wrote:
No it wasn't, at least not to me. The subject line says 4, not 4 and 5. So does the message.
Well everyone who votes 5 makes it a point to say so :-) If Chris makes 4 non-anonymous I bet he'd also make 5 non-anonymous. BTW I am a little annoyed that my OP got voted down. :|
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
Luc Pattyn wrote:
No it wasn't, at least not to me. The subject line says 4, not 4 and 5. So does the message.
Well everyone who votes 5 makes it a point to say so :-) If Chris makes 4 non-anonymous I bet he'd also make 5 non-anonymous. BTW I am a little annoyed that my OP got voted down. :|
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
You realise this will result in a dramatic drop in up-votes, right?
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
Luc Pattyn wrote:
No it wasn't, at least not to me. The subject line says 4, not 4 and 5. So does the message.
Well everyone who votes 5 makes it a point to say so :-) If Chris makes 4 non-anonymous I bet he'd also make 5 non-anonymous. BTW I am a little annoyed that my OP got voted down. :|
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
I down-voted your message, as I completely disagreed. If it were advocating non-annonymous 4's AND 5's I would have agreed and would have upvoted. Isn't that what the voting system is for, to express appreciation and/or agreement? :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
-
I down-voted your message, as I completely disagreed. If it were advocating non-annonymous 4's AND 5's I would have agreed and would have upvoted. Isn't that what the voting system is for, to express appreciation and/or agreement? :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
I upvoted you for that. But I'm not leaving a comment. Oh, hang on... :doh:
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
You realise this will result in a dramatic drop in up-votes, right?
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
You realise this will result in a dramatic drop in up-votes, right?
How so? Why would anyone be embarrassed to cast an up-vote and have the world know that he did so? Personally I make it a point to explicitly tell people that I voted their article a 5 and that it deserved it. He need not post a comment. Since you automatically post a My vote of X message when a vote is cast.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
I down-voted your message, as I completely disagreed. If it were advocating non-annonymous 4's AND 5's I would have agreed and would have upvoted. Isn't that what the voting system is for, to express appreciation and/or agreement? :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Luc Pattyn wrote:
I down-voted your message, as I completely disagreed.
If you disagree with what I said, reply to me explaining why. I take your down-voting my post as a personal insult. If we were debating about something in real life (face to face), would you resort to punching me in the face if I said something you do not agree with? That's how I see your down-vote here. I don't care about most down-votes normally but I do care when it's people like you who I hoped would be more mature about it.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
I down-voted your message, as I completely disagreed. If it were advocating non-annonymous 4's AND 5's I would have agreed and would have upvoted. Isn't that what the voting system is for, to express appreciation and/or agreement? :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Luc Pattyn wrote:
Isn't that what the voting system is for, to express appreciation and/or agreement?
:)Down-voting in my opinion is usually to mark a post as spam/troll/abuse or to insult someone. It's the online equivalent of spitting in someone's face.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
I upvoted you for that. But I'm not leaving a comment. Oh, hang on... :doh:
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Nice going Chris. Encourage him the one time he agrees with your point of view. ;P
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
Luc Pattyn wrote:
I down-voted your message, as I completely disagreed.
If you disagree with what I said, reply to me explaining why. I take your down-voting my post as a personal insult. If we were debating about something in real life (face to face), would you resort to punching me in the face if I said something you do not agree with? That's how I see your down-vote here. I don't care about most down-votes normally but I do care when it's people like you who I hoped would be more mature about it.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
Sorry Nish, be assured it wasn't my intent to insult anyone, all I did was join the thread late, read all of it, add my view at the then bottom, and down-vote the message I disagreed with most, and that was the top message, which happened to be yours. I didn't want to post the same thing twice, and replying to you directly rather than at the bottom, could have split the thread in two subthreads for no good reason IMO. But you're right, maybe I should have anyway. To relieve the situation a bit, I'm going to change my vote from 1 to 3, as long as you understand I don't agree with the words you wrote and, in my view, did not express well what you intended. :rose:
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
-
Sorry Nish, be assured it wasn't my intent to insult anyone, all I did was join the thread late, read all of it, add my view at the then bottom, and down-vote the message I disagreed with most, and that was the top message, which happened to be yours. I didn't want to post the same thing twice, and replying to you directly rather than at the bottom, could have split the thread in two subthreads for no good reason IMO. But you're right, maybe I should have anyway. To relieve the situation a bit, I'm going to change my vote from 1 to 3, as long as you understand I don't agree with the words you wrote and, in my view, did not express well what you intended. :rose:
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Luc Pattyn wrote:
be assured it wasn't my intent to insult anyone,
Yes, I was aware of that. I reckon we just see the voting system differently.
Luc Pattyn wrote:
as long as you understand I don't agree with the words you wrote and, in my view, did not express well what you intended.
Well you are right. I did not ever say make 5 votes non-anonymous too. Since I was specifically focusing on the 4 votes (the new 1s as Pete said above). But I would assume that if Chris does make 4 votes result in an automatic comment, he may do that for 5 votes too. It would be interesting to see how that affects voting patterns here.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
-
Luc Pattyn wrote:
be assured it wasn't my intent to insult anyone,
Yes, I was aware of that. I reckon we just see the voting system differently.
Luc Pattyn wrote:
as long as you understand I don't agree with the words you wrote and, in my view, did not express well what you intended.
Well you are right. I did not ever say make 5 votes non-anonymous too. Since I was specifically focusing on the 4 votes (the new 1s as Pete said above). But I would assume that if Chris does make 4 votes result in an automatic comment, he may do that for 5 votes too. It would be interesting to see how that affects voting patterns here.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
I reckon we just see the voting system differently.
It seems so. I tend not to attach emotion to votes, giving nor receiving. Down-votes are a fact of life when active on a forum such as this one; and I appreciate the voting system that allows both down- and up-votes, as the resulting score is the best possible reflection of what readers think IMO. Getting a down-vote often makes me think again about what I wrote, but it doesn't cause extra blood pressure, nor should it. Now let's see how the CP voting systems evolve... :)
Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
-
Luc Pattyn wrote:
Isn't that what the voting system is for, to express appreciation and/or agreement?
:)Down-voting in my opinion is usually to mark a post as spam/troll/abuse or to insult someone. It's the online equivalent of spitting in someone's face.
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com Part 2 in my WinRT/C++ series : Visual C++ and WinRT/Metro - Databinding Basics
Those are all valid reasons for down votes. Do you consider it unreasonable then that other people have additional reasons for down voting. Such as indicating disagreement with a post. Especially when you consider jokes that offend one group of people, but is considered humourous by another group. Down voting provides many with a way to express their displeasure whether they post or not. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]