Subscriber Discussion
Voting Button
can someone explain the appearance of a voting button next to posts in discussions?
12/12/13 06:30pm
Neat feature. Votes should really default to 1 though, that is more of the "standard" for these kinds of things.
12/12/13 07:22pm
Because the hope of gathering fake, meaningless internet points is supposed to encourage people to post more and post better. See Reddit and Facebook.
| 12/12/13 07:54pm
It also serves as a good way for people to indicate agreement or disagreement with something without having to fill up a thread with "me too" comments. I think it's a useful feature.
Its interesting how its a net like/dislike number. A zero could mean a yawn or a bitterly contested stalemate.
Even more interesting is that it seems to be available to all the old discussions/posts!
Get back to your all-time favorite posts and vote, vote, vote!
Are they anonymous? Pseudonymous?
Also fun is the polarizing "take a position" mechanism of the button, once you go up or down you can't get back to Switzerland...
Regardless, an Excellent move,IPVM!
C
Hey, cool! I just discovered that you can vote for your own posts, but once you've voted, you can't move it back to zero. It's either +1 or -1.
I second Brian Karas' suggestion that they default to 1, provided it's stored as own person's vote for self. That would equalize all self-voters with all self-ignorers.
12/13/13 01:39pm
This absolutely nails my craving for external validation on IPVM. Thanks!
We made a few changes to voting:
- Voting now shows the individual up and down votes instead of just the net number - example: previously it might be "4", now it shows "+6 / -2" giving members a clearer sense of how much interest the comment is drawing
- If there are no votes for a comment, it displays 'vote' rather than '0' to make it clearer that no one has voted at all
- Members now cannot vote for their own comments.
Here's a crazy idea:
You can't see the name of the poster until you vote, kinda like temporary Undisclosed.
Might make people really read, and even then you can never be sure who it might be!
I'd like to encourage more people to vote but blocking them from seeing the person's name is a pretty sizeable limitation. i am open to other suggestions/ ideas.
Main problem right now is that 80% of the votes are coming from a dozen members, so the votes are very skewed and therefore not as useful.
LOL
IPVM EDITOR - DELETED - CONFUSING - MADE UP
Too late. I already received the email....
Only 20 negative votes? I guess I'll just have to try harder. :-[
1. it wasn't made up.
2. It clearly said it was unofficial as well as not from IPVM.
3. Readers are just as intelligent as admins. You could just strike it out instead.
4. $100 dollar wager to charity of your choice that the post was 90%-100% accurate?
Just to clarify I wasn't saying to block them permantly, just maybe when you load the page any unread comments would have a placeholder until you hit 'reveal author' or something... Or not if you set a preference... Not in love with the idea tho, just thinking anonymous voter=anonymous votee...
Actually one of the reasons that I was trying to come up with something is it looks like someone is down voting you as a matter of course instead of for your position. '
C
I also agree with the idea of not being able to see who made the comment before a vote is placed. That way people are either agreeing or disagreeing with the comment rather than the one posting the comment.
Interesting that the articles themselves are not subject to member voting.
You do realize that members are free to leave a comment on any article, start a discussion, or email any of us directly?
We can add voting on articles, but I am still trying to see the value/use of it on comments. A number of people asked for voting on comments, but this is the first request for voting on articles.
Thanks for posting, Brian; these insights often escape me :)
It's not always clear that the number of comments on an article necessarily correlate to the value of the article.
Chris asked for nominees for the best post of 2013, which seemed like a neat idea.
Because voting has been in place for a limited time, it wasn't able to shed much light on this question.
The next thought that came to my mind was, I wonder people might have nominated as the best article of 2013?
One can argue the merits of crowd sourcing "best of" selections through the voting buttons, but it does provide one particular view into the matter. At the start of a new year, if there was IPVM management interest in this particular method of assessing value, now's not a bad time to implement such a feature.
Horace, regarding voting on articles, it's not about 'management interest' or even time.
The issue is the value / meaning of votes. Right now, the top voted comment is Brian's pimp/pricing one with a +9 / -1. This is ridiculous as it's an off color quip, calling into question on what merits people vote for comments.
*Tied (unofficially) with Keefe of course beginning this thread.
Maybe you're both right, it might be better if we only allowed voting on articles as a whole and discussions at the top level. Those authors are usually asking (and ready) for feedback and their content mostly quip-less...
That was exactly my point in a previous thread Lose The Votes!
Voting tends to make comment posting popularity contests, IMO.
YAY!!!
Two more negative votes. Please feel free - I need to balance out my score (now approximately 43 to 22, according to Chris' last estimate).
Stop it!!! You're taking my vote count in the wrong direction.
can someone explain the disappearance of a voting button next to posts in discussions?
Newest Discussions
| Discussion | Posts | Latest |
|---|---|---|
|
Started by
John Honovich
|
6
|
less than a minute by Undisclosed #2 |
|
Started by
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
|
7
|
less than a minute by Undisclosed Integrator #2 |
|
Started by
Brian Rhodes
|
1
|
3 minutes by Brian Rhodes |
|
Burglars Steal 4G Camera, ~$8,000 In Tools, Camera Is Still Transmitting Video From Burglars Home.
(4)
Started by
Jermaine Wilson
|
4
|
less than a minute by Ryan King |
|
Started by
Lee Jones
|
5
|
less than a minute by Lee Jones |
