|
I am in favour of a system where people only vote to say an article is worthwhile. That way the voting games on articles are removed.
|
|
|
|
|
This is something Hans and myself have discussed. My one problem is that an "out of 5" voting system makes it very clear, at a glance, what the consensus is on an article, whereas a value of N thumbs-up just gives you an absolute number with no context. Is 10 good? 100? 1000? What if 10 people liked it but 1000 people didn't?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
It's always going to be a judgement call for the reader, but perhaps if the emphasis is moved to views and usefulness you could achieve the same, e.g. 10,000,000 people viewed this article and only one found it useful. With the voting games, good articles can be swamped by downvotes of people who are just trying to boost their own articles in the initial two weeks. It's all very well saying that good articles will recover, but they will only do so if they are seen and this is something that becomes problematic when a quick couple of downvotes knocks them off the first page on the day of release.
|
|
|
|
|
I am kind of proud of my recent PRISM articles and happy that they received a bunch of votes, bookmarks and quite a lot of downloads. The good reception (which increased my score) is definitely a motivator for me to write more articles.
I have not experienced the "voting games" as you called them, but if they do happen, perhaps the site can require that those who vote 1 should explain themselves. Another solution can be that negative outliers are not counted in until they constitute a sizable percentage of the votes.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Polyak wrote: those who vote 1 should explain themselves
Already in place
Nick Polyak wrote: negative outliers are not counted in until they constitute a sizable percentage of the votes.
We have played with this extensively and there is a very small, but real problem of negative votes from a true expert who may know the topic better than the author being completely hidden due to more popular votes.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure about historical downloads, but keeping track of who downloaded what when shouldn't be too hard, considering you must be logged in to download anything.
|
|
|
|
|
What about if a new version of the same file is uploaded?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
It does not matter, it can be per user per article or it can be per user per version per article. More important to prevent the ability to download the same file by the same person indefinitely.
Nick Polyak
modified on Tuesday, May 3, 2011 12:16 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the catch. That tawdry WINKS LONDON ... they have been manhandled off the site.
As a side note, bless your heart for wandering around the Press Releases. There aren't many people who would dare enter that wood.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest, to show only one update entry per day/author on the home page.
An advanced mode could be, to group the daily author updates into the latest/newest entry.
[Edit] Trick/Alternate(s) should also be grouped.
|
|
|
|
|
Why?
An updated article is an updated article.
|
|
|
|
|
The article update section is a prominent area for new articles.
If an author updates multiple articles consecutively, any previous published article has a much smaller presentation time slot.
|
|
|
|
|
So an author that updates multiple articles gets penalized?
|
|
|
|
|
No. The newest article would be visible. Also a grouping option disarms a penalization.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I see.
If the "grouping option" was something like a "+" expando block, then that would make sense.
|
|
|
|
|
As an author, if I post(or update) two articles I will very much want to see those two articles listed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
26 Apr 2011 7:26 PM Object Associated File 5
Got that in my reputation history. The "Event" and "Reputation" cells were empty.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems, that article downloads are affecting now the reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
Jani Giannoudis wrote: It seems, that article downloads are affecting now the reputation.
Ah that makes sense. Thanks Jani!
|
|
|
|
|
I have the impression, that this feature should be improved:
- the Web-Server 21/22/24 returns empty values for 'Event' and 'Reputation' (Web02 is OK)
- the link to the source article is missing
- downloading the own article creates two entries (2 and 5 points)
- no restriction: any downloading is counted - can be misused to increase a reputation
|
|
|
|
|
Well they usually upload a version first, then fix the live bugs, and upload the bug fixed version. The live site always throws out some errors that their staging server does not. So I guess this will be resolved in a few days time.
|
|
|
|
|
... any baby cries at birth
|
|
|
|
|
|
I should make that my sig.
However, this one was particularly awkward because it's release schedule corresponded to me being away on holidays (Sorry, "holidays") and the dev who did the work also being away. We screwed up the UI / experience and we'll fix it. The important thing is that we're recording the data and once we tweak it it will be as good as gold.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|