The voting button is a new feature. Let us know if you have feedback.
Neat feature. Votes should really default to 1 though, that is more of the "standard" for these kinds of things.
Chesapeake & Midlantic | 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.
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!
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.
Trecerdo, LLC | 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 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.
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.
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?