|
fxgranite
Feb 3, 2009, 8:52 PM
Post #51 of 176
(7129 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2007
Posts: 358
|
qwert wrote: But first and foremost: GET RID OF THOSE WHITE BOXES AROUND THE STARS! THAT TOTALLY BUGS ME! You totally just got voted a 1 for pointing that out
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 8:54 PM
Post #52 of 176
(7127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
qwert wrote: I am not shure what to think of the idea. It could be very usefull to have some way to identify good content, but being able to rate every single post is a bit too much. Also how does the number of posts get weighted? For example we have one thread with only one post that is so stupid that noone even clicks on the title, apart from dumbn00b92s buddy, who rates dumbn00b92s post on how to safe money by using hardwear store carabiners a 5. So The only thing on carabiners with a straight five that pops up in the search first will then be this lunacy. Maybe better to rate threads? Wait for a minimum amount of votes until the ratings take effect? And the visual side: It is too distracting at the moment. It needs to be much smaller. Maybe place it to the side, sowhere under the avatar? But first and foremost: GET RID OF THOSE WHITE BOXES AROUND THE STARS! THAT TOTALLY BUGS ME! No seriously, give those little grafics a background that is matching the forum color, like this: [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=3195;[/image] [image]http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=3196;[/image] qwert Gotcha. I hadn't even noticed the white boxes before.
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Feb 3, 2009, 8:56 PM
Post #53 of 176
(7124 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
j_ung wrote: imnotclever wrote: jAY you can't let this be active in the community forums though. That'd bee tooo much. You're right. --POOF!-- It is done. Edit: although ratings will remain live in the Ladies Room. WTF? That's the place they're needed the most.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 8:59 PM
Post #54 of 176
(7120 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
clausti wrote: j_ung wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: j_ung wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: I find the new feature annoying. At best. A useless feature that brings nothing to the table. It isn't going to improve "content", eliminate trolls, or help determine which zingers are actually funny. On it's own, no. You're correct. I'm well aware that there's no such thing as a magic bullet. I didn't intend to imply that the stars wouldn't solve everything. I ment to imply they wouldn't solve anything. I guess I'm stuck on "why the feature" Unless it is one part of an integrated new feature set???. Yes, indeedy. Eventually the search feature will rely heavily on it, and hopefully users will also be able to set filters, much like they used to be able to do with trophies and poo. This is part of the package that includes blue forums and the eventual killfile. how is this going to improve the search feature? are you going to classify the posts by topic? because the biggest problem right now with telling people to "do a search" for something (by topic) is that the search feature will only return posts with the search terms in it, rather than returning *thread* ranked by number of times the search terms are included. and the biggest problem with searching for a particular post/phrase, is that you can't sift through results by sorting by multiple criteria (poster, date, thread title) on the fly. but i do fail to see how this is going to help the search feature. Again, don't think of this as a stand-alone feature. It works in conjunction with other features. As for the search, my goal is to: 1. Have it return a list of threads, instead of individual posts. 2. Make the advanced, feature-rich search the rule, instead of the exception. 3. Rank results based on both the number of times the search terms appear and the presence of highly rated posts. Trust me, I understand all the problems with the current search feature, and it's next on the list.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 9:01 PM
Post #55 of 176
(7113 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
donald949 wrote: happiegrrrl wrote: Ah...No. One cannot see their own post ratings. You do understand, I am sure Jay, that all a person has to do is ask what their stars are. Is this another scheme to get post count increases???? edit: hey! The stars weren't on the post of mine I looked at before??? At least I don't think they were.... Happie, That is how I saw it go down. Don This thread is probably getting hard to follow. You just witnessed a change taking effect. Users can now see their own averages, but they cannot vote on their own posts.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 9:04 PM
Post #56 of 176
(7106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
wjca wrote: j_ung wrote: imnotclever wrote: jAY you can't let this be active in the community forums though. That'd bee tooo much. You're right. --POOF!-- It is done. Edit: although ratings will remain live in the Ladies Room. WTF? That's the place they're needed the most.
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Feb 3, 2009, 9:04 PM
Post #57 of 176
(7102 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
j_ung wrote: This thread is probably getting hard to follow. You just witnessed a change taking effect. Users can now see their own averages, but they cannot vote on their own posts. At least all of my troll accounts can still tell me how awesome I am.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 10:15 PM
Post #58 of 176
(7066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
FYI, the stars are smaller and their backgrounds are fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
Valarc
Feb 3, 2009, 10:16 PM
Post #59 of 176
(7062 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
j_ung wrote: FYI, the stars are smaller and their backgrounds are fixed. MUCH BETTER, visually. I still prefer the up/down idea, though, and will continue harping on it.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 10:19 PM
Post #61 of 176
(7063 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Valarc wrote: j_ung wrote: FYI, the stars are smaller and their backgrounds are fixed. MUCH BETTER, visually. I still prefer the up/down idea, though, and will continue harping on it. Deal.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 10:20 PM
Post #62 of 176
(7060 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
shockabuku wrote: j_ung wrote: Now, heh, I know the temptation to pile the ones onto a person you dislike is great (or in the case of the BET pile them on your friends). Try not to do that, huh? I guess I should have read this first. Meh. Don't worry. I don't think anybody expects there to NOT be an immediate explosion in misused ratings. I'm more interested in what happens after the novelty wears off.
|
|
|
|
|
clausti
Feb 3, 2009, 10:36 PM
Post #63 of 176
(7048 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Posts: 5690
|
j_ung wrote: Again, don't think of this as a stand-alone feature. It works in conjunction with other features. As for the search, my goal is to: 1. Have it return a list of threads, instead of individual posts. 2. Make the advanced, feature-rich search the rule, instead of the exception. 3. Rank results based on both the number of times the search terms appear and the presence of highly rated posts. Trust me, I understand all the problems with the current search feature, and it's next on the list. all of those things are good, (are you also going to be able to search by post?), but i still don't see what that has to do with the stars. and i vote for the simpler up/down voting, as well.
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Feb 3, 2009, 10:51 PM
Post #64 of 176
(7039 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
Ummm... question: What do I win when I collect one hundred stars? A special prize? Some sort of special, one-time-use forum power like the ability to edit and lock one other person's post?
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Feb 3, 2009, 11:08 PM
Post #65 of 176
(7035 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Every user already has the ability to lock posts, but the button is cleverly hidden. When you reach one hundred stars I personally travel to your home and hand you a kitten.
(This post was edited by j_ung on Feb 3, 2009, 11:09 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Feb 3, 2009, 11:16 PM
Post #66 of 176
(7027 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
You're lucky I can't actually count that high or I'd hold you to that.
|
|
|
|
|
donald949
Feb 3, 2009, 11:32 PM
Post #67 of 176
(7023 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2007
Posts: 11455
|
Valarc wrote: j_ung wrote: FYI, the stars are smaller and their backgrounds are fixed. MUCH BETTER, visually. I still prefer the up/down idea, though, and will continue harping on it. Agreed, the stars are better now.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Feb 3, 2009, 11:41 PM
Post #68 of 176
(7022 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
kachoong wrote: Jay, ...if you have voted on a post, leave the thread, then come back to it, and then hover the mouse over the stars again the vote disappears. ...a minor glitch perhaps? I'm finding if I go over the stars and don't click anything it still registers as a one star vote. Edited to add: Its not doing it now and the one star disappeared when I left and went back to the page
(This post was edited by chossmonkey on Feb 3, 2009, 11:50 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Feb 3, 2009, 11:45 PM
Post #69 of 176
(7019 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
kachoong wrote: Valarc wrote: I think a digg or reddit style thumbs up/thumbs down system would be both simpler and more effective. Each thumbs up is a +1, and each thumbs down is a -1 - the post gets an overall score, so posts that were loved by lots of people will get a high score. This would make sorting a lot more intuitive - under the current system, a post with one 5-star vote looks better than a post with five 5-star votes and 1 one-star, depending on how you handle the rounding. Under the +/- system, the first post would have a score of +1, while the second would have a score of +4, more clearly illustrating that the second was enjoyed by more people. ...You obviously weren't here for the poo trophy wars.... And you really think this will be better? Its unlimited ammo now. At least before people were limited to 5 votes a day and most didn't get to vote everyday. I also think a plus, minus and nuetral system would be much better. I'll go hide now. I think I heard j_ung coming down the hall with that supersized hex.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Feb 3, 2009, 11:53 PM
Post #70 of 176
(7014 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
j_ung wrote: Every user already has the ability to lock posts, but the button is cleverly hidden. It will be finded. "check coding"
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Feb 4, 2009, 12:11 AM
Post #71 of 176
(7007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
sungam wrote: j_ung wrote: Every user already has the ability to lock posts, but the button is cleverly hidden. It will be finded. "check coding" Don't think I'll reward you with stars just for that. I know you're gunning for a hundred of them to get that free kitten. Admit it: you're just in it for the puss... um, nevermind.
|
|
|
|
|
yokese
Feb 4, 2009, 1:34 AM
Post #72 of 176
(6995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 18, 2006
Posts: 672
|
I agree with Valarc and others. An average rating is meaningless without knowing how many votes have been cast. A +/- system seems more logical too. How many 2,3 or 4-stars a post is gonna get?. I'd bet that most of the rated post will get either 5-stars or 1-star votes, which might make the average even less meaningful. Anyways, I'll wait a bit longer to see if the system provides any real advantage or disadvantage. On the bright side, so far it's being fun to play around with the stars... I guess the fuss will fade away in a couple of hours.
|
|
|
|
|
clausti
Feb 4, 2009, 1:54 AM
Post #73 of 176
(6988 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2004
Posts: 5690
|
is it just me, or do the thread pages load slower now, in particular, when skipping to the last unread post? maybe i'm noticing it more because i have my posts/page set to 50.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 4, 2009, 2:25 AM
Post #74 of 176
(6984 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Jay, I think that you should show the number of votes next to the average rating. Without that, you don't know how to interpret the rating. If a post has 1 star, for instance, you don't know whether it represents a single pissed off rater or a consensus turd. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
rockie
Feb 4, 2009, 3:12 AM
Post #75 of 176
(6973 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2007
Posts: 1130
|
I think it's nuts..
|
|
|
|
|
|