in reply to Reputations

I would like to see an "explanation" textfield added to the voting radio buttons, so that people (or perhaps just the author of the original post) can see why people are voting them up or down. The ratings could still be anonymous-- in fact, I think they should be, to avoid the possibility of people retalliating for -- votes.

I know from experience that it is distressing to see your posts modded down without knowing what you did wrong so you can act differently next time. By the same token, it's nice to know what aspects of my modded-up posts were useful to people. I think this change would have the further positive effect of separating discussion from meta-discussion; too many comments I see nowadays say only, "Great post! You were really clear on X, and I like the idea of Y." I think this praise is valid and useful in its own right, but I would rather not see it mixed in with more technical replies.

What do you think? Does this make sense? I guess I'll know if this comment gets modded up. ;)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: Explanation with ++ and --
by Russ (Deacon) on Jun 22, 2000 at 11:10 UTC
    I agree, in principle.

    Of course, the other side to consider: most of this site is geared toward encouraging us to post. While I really like your idea of a separate (and private) feedback system, the goal of Perl Monks is to generate traffic for the banner ads. Lots of posts to read means more excitement about the site, which means more traffic, which means more revenue.

    Since negative votes should be rare (and justified), perhaps a "middle ground" would be to require an explanation for negative votes, but allow normal posts for praise/positive votes. Explanations could be very short, and would be delivered only to the author.