Voting etiquette
-
[Monty Python voice] I'd just like to say that I think it terribly rude to vote down an article without leaving a word of explanation, terribly, terribly orrf. Good day to you all. [/Monty python voice] Seriously - that's supposed to be the CP contract right? If not, maybe it should be. Someone publishes, it gets reviewed and scored. Then the article gets revised, with luck improved, or it gets binned. No feedback, no progress, no learning. I don't think I'm the only one who views the stuff here as having a decent degree of permanence? It is not quite like a newspaper, discarded after one reading ... ? Quasi-hypothetical question here. The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...? Jerry
-
[Monty Python voice] I'd just like to say that I think it terribly rude to vote down an article without leaving a word of explanation, terribly, terribly orrf. Good day to you all. [/Monty python voice] Seriously - that's supposed to be the CP contract right? If not, maybe it should be. Someone publishes, it gets reviewed and scored. Then the article gets revised, with luck improved, or it gets binned. No feedback, no progress, no learning. I don't think I'm the only one who views the stuff here as having a decent degree of permanence? It is not quite like a newspaper, discarded after one reading ... ? Quasi-hypothetical question here. The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...? Jerry
I believe to vote 1 or 2 you have to provide a reason. (And that reason gets posted publicly on the articles message board with the heading "my vote of 1..."). There is nothing stopping the voter from removing the public message, or just renaming it though, or even just typing garbage in the reason box. Some people just can't follow basic etiquette and you'll never solve that problem. With any luck the votes will just average out in time and any outliers will become fairly irrelevant. (Also, I believe votes are weighted by membership status, so a gold member vote is worth more than a bronze member vote)
Simon
-
[Monty Python voice] I'd just like to say that I think it terribly rude to vote down an article without leaving a word of explanation, terribly, terribly orrf. Good day to you all. [/Monty python voice] Seriously - that's supposed to be the CP contract right? If not, maybe it should be. Someone publishes, it gets reviewed and scored. Then the article gets revised, with luck improved, or it gets binned. No feedback, no progress, no learning. I don't think I'm the only one who views the stuff here as having a decent degree of permanence? It is not quite like a newspaper, discarded after one reading ... ? Quasi-hypothetical question here. The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...? Jerry
Well, the system in place almost requires an explanation for a 1 or 2 vote. I say almost because it's moderately easy to get around the requirement.
"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 -
[Monty Python voice] I'd just like to say that I think it terribly rude to vote down an article without leaving a word of explanation, terribly, terribly orrf. Good day to you all. [/Monty python voice] Seriously - that's supposed to be the CP contract right? If not, maybe it should be. Someone publishes, it gets reviewed and scored. Then the article gets revised, with luck improved, or it gets binned. No feedback, no progress, no learning. I don't think I'm the only one who views the stuff here as having a decent degree of permanence? It is not quite like a newspaper, discarded after one reading ... ? Quasi-hypothetical question here. The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...? Jerry
-
OK, I just voted 1 for your post fifteen times. My explanation... I hate Monty Python. (My momma done taught me ettykit good.)
We're talknig articles here and not forums... and...
Abu Mami wrote:
I hate Monty Python
How can anyone hate the parrot sketch - I say ne to you sir!
-
We're talknig articles here and not forums... and...
Abu Mami wrote:
I hate Monty Python
How can anyone hate the parrot sketch - I say ne to you sir!
-
We're talknig articles here and not forums... and...
Abu Mami wrote:
I hate Monty Python
How can anyone hate the parrot sketch - I say ne to you sir!
-
hopingToCode wrote:
We're talknig articles here and not forums... and...
Oh, sorry, excuse my while I go stompin' through the articles voting 1 and looking for flimsy excuses. [quote]sir![/quote] Wow, "sir". Even my kids just call me "hey you".
-
hopingToCode wrote:
We're talknig articles here and not forums... and...
Oh, sorry, excuse my while I go stompin' through the articles voting 1 and looking for flimsy excuses. [quote]sir![/quote] Wow, "sir". Even my kids just call me "hey you".
LOL ... and as for the sir .. well if you want me to change it I'm sure I can find other things to call you, some of which are nicer then "hey you" and some of them, well lets just leave it at that!
-
I think you meant "nay". "Ne" makes no sense. "Ni" would be good to. We are the knights of NI!
-
sk8er_boy287 wrote:
I think you meant "nay". "Ne" makes no sense. "Ni" would be good to.
How about "nah", or "nyah"? "Neigh" could work for a horse.
-
I believe to vote 1 or 2 you have to provide a reason. (And that reason gets posted publicly on the articles message board with the heading "my vote of 1..."). There is nothing stopping the voter from removing the public message, or just renaming it though, or even just typing garbage in the reason box. Some people just can't follow basic etiquette and you'll never solve that problem. With any luck the votes will just average out in time and any outliers will become fairly irrelevant. (Also, I believe votes are weighted by membership status, so a gold member vote is worth more than a bronze member vote)
Simon
Simon Stevens wrote:
There is nothing stopping the voter from removing the public message
Removing the message removes the vote.
-
Simon Stevens wrote:
There is nothing stopping the voter from removing the public message
Removing the message removes the vote.
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Removing the message removes the vote.
Ohh..does it. Now that's quite nifty isn't it. What about changing the messages title?
Simon
-
[Monty Python voice] I'd just like to say that I think it terribly rude to vote down an article without leaving a word of explanation, terribly, terribly orrf. Good day to you all. [/Monty python voice] Seriously - that's supposed to be the CP contract right? If not, maybe it should be. Someone publishes, it gets reviewed and scored. Then the article gets revised, with luck improved, or it gets binned. No feedback, no progress, no learning. I don't think I'm the only one who views the stuff here as having a decent degree of permanence? It is not quite like a newspaper, discarded after one reading ... ? Quasi-hypothetical question here. The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...? Jerry
Jerry Evans wrote:
The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...?
Members are allowed to vote any darn way they like.
-
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Removing the message removes the vote.
Ohh..does it. Now that's quite nifty isn't it. What about changing the messages title?
Simon
Changing the subject is OK, and preferred.
-
Jerry Evans wrote:
The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...?
Members are allowed to vote any darn way they like.
Of course they should. That's the point. The thing is to reciprocate the right to vote with the expectation of some kind of comment - even if it is 'blah - hate your idea and your code'.
-
Of course they should. That's the point. The thing is to reciprocate the right to vote with the expectation of some kind of comment - even if it is 'blah - hate your idea and your code'.
Absolutely. I got a really useful 1 vote once. "Poor". Really helpful, that was.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
-
[Monty Python voice] I'd just like to say that I think it terribly rude to vote down an article without leaving a word of explanation, terribly, terribly orrf. Good day to you all. [/Monty python voice] Seriously - that's supposed to be the CP contract right? If not, maybe it should be. Someone publishes, it gets reviewed and scored. Then the article gets revised, with luck improved, or it gets binned. No feedback, no progress, no learning. I don't think I'm the only one who views the stuff here as having a decent degree of permanence? It is not quite like a newspaper, discarded after one reading ... ? Quasi-hypothetical question here. The code of conduct for the lounge hangs above the door - why not do the same for voting ...? Jerry
Hi Jerry, I see anonymous voting down as a "sacred right" : if explanation is required, I think it should be required for all votes. Why should I waste my intellectual energy on posts I view as off-topic, poisoned by some political agenda or prejudice, or describing minutiae of details of someone's personal life as if CP' lounge was some kind of "reality tv" where I am "forced" to particiipate ? For technical articles, for me, that's a different story. I would give a brief note on a low vote IF I thought there was the slightest chance it would be a constructive comment. Think of it this way : I wipe my hands with a napkin to take off random spatter of a passing bird; the napkin belongs in the trash, not back on the table. best, Bill
"Many : not conversant with mathematical studies, imagine that because it [the Analytical Engine] is to give results in numerical notation, its processes must consequently be arithmetical, numerical, rather than algebraical and analytical. This is an error. The engine can arrange and combine numerical quantities as if they were letters or any other general symbols; and it fact it might bring out its results in algebraical notation, were provisions made accordingly." Ada, Countess Lovelace, 1844
