Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl: the Markov chain saw

Reputation Viewing Option?

by PipTigger (Hermit)
on Aug 30, 2000 at 19:55 UTC ( [id://30316] : monkdiscuss . print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

I know vroom is psycho-busy (or I assume he is anyway) so I wanted to check if anyone else thinks it would be cool to have an option (in user settings) to see a node's reputation whether you've voted on it or not. This could be particularly useful for the questionable content consideration stuff... Sometimes one might distribute all of their votes with reckless abandon and be left unable to consider a reputation until the following day's generous allocation. What do you think?


p.s. the most cigarettes

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(Ozymandias) RE: Reputation Viewing Option?
by Ozymandias (Hermit) on Aug 30, 2000 at 20:03 UTC
    This has been discussed many, many times. The short version of the discussion is that it's a very bad idea to allow users to see node reputations before they vote on the nodes; you should be voting on the node based on its content and on what you personally think of it, not based on what other people did.

    That also goes for content consideration; if it's offensive to you, if it's sufficiently insulting that you believe it should be deleted, then submit it for consideration and vote to delete it. If it's not, then don't, or if someone else has submitted it for consideration, vote to keep it. You should not be factoring other people's opinions into your decision.

    - email Ozymandias
      Browsing the old discussion, you summarized one of the positions. Another is that what good is it as a reputation if it cannot factor into people's judgement of a node?

      A position that I feel which apparently has not factored into this discussion is that every voting system has its anomolies. The current one favours short posts that are immediately understandable to everyone. It is appropriate if you want a popularity read, and not an indication of quality.

      If your goal is to be able to identify who is liked and reward the poster, then the current choice makes sense.

      If your goal is to develop information from which later on you can index into useful site documentation, then it doesn't.

      Before you can point it out, I don't have the history with this site. I don't know what the voting system here is meant to address. OTOH I have been used as a sounding board for some of the ideas on how to use a voting system for the next incarnation of kuro5hin (pronounced corrosion) to help it deal with the troll problems that shut them down last time...

      I understand... I was just perusing old threads on the topic and am convinced that you are absolutely correct. kudra rightly recommended I read up and post a link with the useful info for further reference so HERE it was. =) Thanks muchly. TTFN.


      p.s. Initiate Nail Removal Immediately!
RE: Reputation Viewing Option?
by Boogman (Scribe) on Aug 30, 2000 at 20:17 UTC
    Yeah, I suggested something like this before as well. I definitely don't think we should be allowed to see the reputations on nodes before you have voted on it. I think we should have a voting option that would say that we don't feel it deserved a ++ vote, but it shouldn't be --'d either. An option that lets us abstain from voting. It should be like the null vote in that it doesn't use up any votes, but unlike the null vote, it would act as if we had voted on that node and let us view the reputation and not allow us to vote on that node in the future.

    I know I have voted up posts that didn't necessarily deserve to be voted up in my opinion because I was curious to see what other people thought about it. Having an option like this would satisfy people's curiosity about the nodes reputation without swaying their vote, or having the nodes rep changed because of it.

      I really like that idea with the modification that it does use up a vote (but doesn't give you any chance for ++XP). That increases the motivation to climb the ranks in order to satisfy your curiosity on more nodes.

              - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
      I also had the same thought a while back, brother Boogman, but have since changed my mind.

      If a Monk Gone BadTM wanted to stalk someone, it could be done using "neutral" votes, such as you describe.

      It's sad, but the Monastery has grown enough that such things do need to be considered.   That, or I forgot to take my meds today and am having paranoid delusions.   :^P   (just joking about meds, but not about the chance that I'm way off base in my thinking on this.)

      Update : a number of fine Monks have pointed out why this is highly unlikely, and I have no reason to doubt them.   Not the first ybiC-brain-hiccup, certainly not the last.   ;^)

        I'm kind of curious what you mean by stalking someone. I would think this would actually help with the Monk Gone Bad situation, cause one of the things you hear people complaining a lot about is people voting -- on all of a certain persons posts. Any nodes that had been abstained on in the past would be unavailable for this sort of attack. Plus if someone wanted to see the reps of the other monks, they still can as it stands now, they would just be changing the reps of the posts as they did so.
        Why go through that effort to be a little more effective?

        Any potential target prominent enough to "be stalked" is likely to get plenty of experience anyways. It is the knowledge that someone is POed but unwilling to discuss it that is the issue, not the experience.

RE: Reputation Viewing Option?
by swiftone (Curate) on Aug 30, 2000 at 22:20 UTC
    Since we're rehashing the issue anyway....
    What is the point of reputation? If it is only available to those that vote on it, it seems mostly useless. It should be an indicator of a good post. If I have a question that I seek an answer to, and I find three posts answering it, how do I know which is best (since we're assuming I didn't know the answer to begin with)? I can't look at the reputations without voting, and I can't knowledgably vote.

      You can sort responses by reputation. See your user settings.

              - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")
        Oh crud. Nevermind my last post :) I looked and didn't see it, but now I do. Maybe adding the same thing to root nodes would be good though.


      I can't look at the reputations without voting, and I can't knowledgably vote.

      You can knowledgably vote by reading the posts and deciding on their own merit which you choose to ++ or --.

      However, I do think you raised a good point. How do I know what the most 'respected' answers to a question are? The trend is that good answers have higher reps than the noise, and bad answers.

      Maybe an option to sort answers based on rep (in User Settings (which it is in now), and a button on root nodes) would be good. We wouldn't see the reps (unless you voted on it) but you would know what others thought were the best.


        You can knowledgably vote by reading the posts and deciding on their own merit which you choose to ++ or --.

        Since I'm asking the question, I presumably don't know which answer is better (I didn't know any answer, after all). I could try both, and then decide on my own, but that takes a lot of work when we have a perfectly good indicator of what everyone else thinks is best.

        I'm not suggesting that rep totals should determine my vote on a matter. I'm suggesting that you can't (or shouldn't) always vote on a post, but knowing the rep would be valuable.

        Update: Sorting based on reps isn't always the answer, since the posts might be in different threads (questions have been asked more than once, or perhaps the questions differ slightly). This is why I like the idea of giving up your ability to vote on a post to be able to see it's rep (the only time I won't vote on a post is when I have no -- or ++ opinion of it, or if I don't know if it is accurate)