Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
 
PerlMonks  

Re: History now influences voting

by goibhniu (Hermit)
on Nov 19, 2007 at 17:50 UTC ( #651709=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to History now influences voting

I mostly agree with the spirit here. I disagree or have some questions with the details.

  • Timing The two-weeks / four-weeks thing seems about right for SOPW, but other forums seem to me to age differently. CUFP and OBFUs are lower down on the RAT page and sometimes people let them sit around longer before coming back to them to give the upvote (or maybe it takes longer to de-obfuscate before you say "aha"). I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water, but perhaps future implementations might set these timings in the system on a per forum basis?
  • Upvoting all one monk I think I understand the problems being solved, but I don't like the idea of being punished because, say, ikegami, is very helpful and writes lots of good nodes. I personally understand the nodevote vs. monkvote distinction; I don't seek out one monk to upvote. Yet often I end up spending a lot of votes on one monk when a) she or he is active and b) she or he is knowledgeable and therefor ends up writing good nodes.
  • Affect on younger monks the above occurs less often now that I have 12 whole votes to cast, but earlier when I had only 4, it would be much easier to spend all my votes in one place. I wouldn't want to endorse something that ends up punishing our youngest monks just as they're getting enthusiastic about the site. Later when they've mellowed and learned not to be so excited about XP, then you could punish them ;).

update (post-preview/pre-commit) just read planetscape's Re: History now influences voting and your response, so much is asuaged, but thought I'd leave in my original comments.


I humbly seek wisdom.


Comment on Re: History now influences voting
Re^2: History now influences voting (time, sections)
by tye (Cardinal) on Nov 19, 2007 at 19:22 UTC

    Even RAT and Newest Nodes don't special-case how long they show things based on the section that they are in. It seems unlikely to me that someone would find nodes in one section after 2 weeks via RAT / NN.

    So I agree that people may not "get to" some sections as frequently as others, but I don't think that tendency has much impact on a time limit that is as long as two weeks.

    - tye        

      Ah, I am sorry; I didn't mean that RAT special cased it's presentation of nodes. I meant that as a user interaction side-effect of RAT putting OBFUs and CUFP at the bottom that users (well, at least this one) would be slower getting to those nodes than PMD or SOPW, which RAT puts at the top.

      You're probably right about two weeks being long enough regardless, but my impression is that popular nodes I've written in SOPW get their reputation quickly and then are forgotten, whereas my japhs get reputation trickling in over time. I expect that your change will be fine (as I said, I agree with the spirit of the change), but request that this aspect be considered as you get empirical data post-impementation.


      I humbly seek wisdom.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://651709]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others browsing the Monastery: (17)
As of 2014-09-17 14:16 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (82 votes), past polls