|
 |
| | | Author: | Bricks  | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 14:30 | | Subject: | Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 194 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | | Status: | Discarded | |
|
| For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
The more highly voted posts will appear before posts which are not voted as highly.
Very large community-oriented websites such as Stack Exchange and Reddit use
this model to prevent spam and make favored content more visible. These websites
effectively moderate themselves by their own community. We have a very strong
community with good standards, and this feature would allow the discussion forums
to reflect that.
The aforementioned websites use a Wilson score for posts to prevent good but
unvoted posts from being invisible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval#Wilson_score_interval
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html
Currently, the message tree and forum front page show the newest posts first.
If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first. This reduces
flaming, abuse, inaccuracies, etc.
What does the community think?
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | jhkc... | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 14:45 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
The more highly voted posts will appear before posts which are not voted as highly.
Very large community-oriented websites such as Stack Exchange and Reddit use
this model to prevent spam and make favored content more visible. These websites
effectively moderate themselves by their own community. We have a very strong
community with good standards, and this feature would allow the discussion forums
to reflect that.
The aforementioned websites use a Wilson score for posts to prevent good but
unvoted posts from being invisible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval#Wilson_score_interval
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html
Currently, the message tree and forum front page show the newest posts first.
If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first. This reduces
flaming, abuse, inaccuracies, etc.
What does the community think?
|
I've come to think of this place as the first definition of community - A
place like a town or neighborhood. Not a group of people defined by a common
interest. There is no common Lego person here. There is no common Lego content.
There isn't even agreement on what to do with our Lego.
So take the first definition. You choose where you live and shop, and you choose
the neighbors and people you interact with. Trying to control things beyond that
starts to feel like a gated community or co-op building with some members voting
on what other members of the community can and can't do. Seems more petty
to me than the meaningless comments you wish to vote down. But that is how the
world works these days, as you mentioned. I'd personally prefer it didn't
do that here.
Jason
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | DagsBricks | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 15:00 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
|
Down vote.
I hate the "sort by relevance" model for forum posts. Whenever I encounter one
of those I look for the "sort by newest" button. I prefer to read things in
chronological order, not order of hivemind importance. Makes more sense that
way.
Perhaps you could change your suggestion to either include this as an option
or to have the text in the downvoted posts traverse through the greyscale to
white. Then you wouldn't have to read the terrible ones.
Brian
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Bricks | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:22 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 28 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | | Perhaps you could change your suggestion to either include this as an option
or to have the text in the downvoted posts traverse through the greyscale to
white. Then you wouldn't have to read the terrible ones.
|
"If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first."
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ToriHada | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 15:03 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I am not sure about this. It could easily turn into a popularity contest. I know
there are some who would vote for or against a post simply because they like
or dislike the poster, many times without even reading what was posted. For those
people, the content does not matter. So if this system is intended to determine
the importance of content and rank posts accordingly, the results will be skewered
by those who vote based on WHO the poster is and not WHAT is posted.
Thor
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | MidwayPete | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 15:30 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| Where do I press the LIKE button for this post?
In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | I am not sure about this. It could easily turn into a popularity contest. I know
there are some who would vote for or against a post simply because they like
or dislike the poster, many times without even reading what was posted. For those
people, the content does not matter. So if this system is intended to determine
the importance of content and rank posts accordingly, the results will be skewered
by those who vote based on WHO the poster is and not WHAT is posted.
Thor
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Rob_and_Shelagh | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:22 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 55 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | I am not sure about this. It could easily turn into a popularity contest. I know
there are some who would vote for or against a post simply because they like
or dislike the poster, many times without even reading what was posted. For those
people, the content does not matter. So if this system is intended to determine
the importance of content and rank posts accordingly, the results will be skewered
by those who vote based on WHO the poster is and not WHAT is posted.
Thor
|
I appreciate the other discussion about me too, non value posts but.... in this
case, me too, I'm exactly with you on this one. This forum on the whole is
well balanced and self regulating, occasionally we get flooded but it usually
sorts itself out. My observation and learning over the years anyway.
Robert
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Bricks | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:35 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 29 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Rob_and_Shelagh writes:
| | In Suggestions, fosterbengoshi writes:
| | I am not sure about this. It could easily turn into a popularity contest. I know
there are some who would vote for or against a post simply because they like
or dislike the poster, many times without even reading what was posted. For those
people, the content does not matter. So if this system is intended to determine
the importance of content and rank posts accordingly, the results will be skewered
by those who vote based on WHO the poster is and not WHAT is posted.
Thor
|
I appreciate the other discussion about me too, non value posts but.... in this
case, me too, I'm exactly with you on this one. This forum on the whole is
well balanced and self regulating, occasionally we get flooded but it usually
sorts itself out. My observation and learning over the years anyway.
Robert
|
I understand that there's a possibility that posts could be skewed toward
a hivemind of BL (if such exists). But if the forum is well-balanced and self-regulating,
then the votes should reflect that, no? The only real change here is that the
flooding would stop before it ever really starts. The forum would sort itself
out automatically.
While many people here will downvote posts because they dislike a particular
user, I believe most BL users are more mature than that. If a user is downvoted
by most voters, then their post is probably bad in some way.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | bb53904 | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 15:37 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
The more highly voted posts will appear before posts which are not voted as highly.
Very large community-oriented websites such as Stack Exchange and Reddit use
this model to prevent spam and make favored content more visible. These websites
effectively moderate themselves by their own community. We have a very strong
community with good standards, and this feature would allow the discussion forums
to reflect that.
The aforementioned websites use a Wilson score for posts to prevent good but
unvoted posts from being invisible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval#Wilson_score_interval
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html
Currently, the message tree and forum front page show the newest posts first.
If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first. This reduces
flaming, abuse, inaccuracies, etc.
What does the community think?
|
I voted No. If you attend a "community meeting", you hear everything in the
order it's said.
Each reply is already a vote.
I wonder how a person's ignore list would be worked into this rating idea.
Thea
Always Learning!
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Cyberclark | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 15:42 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| I voted yes, but only if it was user configurable. So basically if someone wanted
to see every post posted they could click an option and see it chronologically.
But if you don't have time to read every post and just want to see the most
popular ones so be it. All the data would still be there, every voice could
still be heard, it is just a user preference thing. Right now the forum gets
so cluttered I guarantee every post isn't being read anyways. Alot of people
just go to the post with the most replies because they think it must be important
and then they skim it and reply with their 2 cents, often repeating what has
already been discussed because they didn't take the time to read it. How
many times do you see people even say "Well I didn't read this whole thread
but here is what I think..."
More options is always a good thing in my opinion as long as they are just that
options. Users can still choose to view the data anyway they want.
In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
The more highly voted posts will appear before posts which are not voted as highly.
Very large community-oriented websites such as Stack Exchange and Reddit use
this model to prevent spam and make favored content more visible. These websites
effectively moderate themselves by their own community. We have a very strong
community with good standards, and this feature would allow the discussion forums
to reflect that.
The aforementioned websites use a Wilson score for posts to prevent good but
unvoted posts from being invisible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval#Wilson_score_interval
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html
Currently, the message tree and forum front page show the newest posts first.
If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first. This reduces
flaming, abuse, inaccuracies, etc.
What does the community think?
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | bb459958 | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:45 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 25 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | jhkc... | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:33 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Loremonger writes:
Your suggestion is different, and actually, would probably go further to alleviate
the OP's frustration with the "me too" jumble. Voted yes on yours. Lots of
people here are saying, quite literally, "where's the like button?"
If we could have an "acknowledge" button of any kind, smiley face without a post
entry, whatever, it may reduce the number of posts that wither and die in the
deafening silence of no response and encourage more people, i.e. more variety,
to stay in the forum. And with variety comes more chances for the quality that
the OP wants.
Jason
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | bb459958 | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:39 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | eileenkeeney | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 16:51 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| This type of model makes sense for communities where there are hundreds or thousands
or more posts and responses, and very few people would actually be reading all
of the responses.
I don't think it fits a forum with the level of traffic on this forum.
It is way too easy to quickly scan what is there, and then choose to just read
those that interest me.
In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
The more highly voted posts will appear before posts which are not voted as highly.
Very large community-oriented websites such as Stack Exchange and Reddit use
this model to prevent spam and make favored content more visible. These websites
effectively moderate themselves by their own community. We have a very strong
community with good standards, and this feature would allow the discussion forums
to reflect that.
The aforementioned websites use a Wilson score for posts to prevent good but
unvoted posts from being invisible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval#Wilson_score_interval
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html
Currently, the message tree and forum front page show the newest posts first.
If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first. This reduces
flaming, abuse, inaccuracies, etc.
What does the community think?
|
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | BLUSER_27068 | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 18:04 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 26 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | What does the community think?
|
I would rather see the time and effort spent on fixing the broken things before
we try to implement new things.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | Mar 18, 2014 20:25 | | Subject: | Re: Suggestion: Forum voting | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Suggestions | |
|
| In Suggestions, Bricks writes:
| | For the past 9 years, and most notably lately, I've noticed forum members
reply or create posts often with meaningless content (e.g., "how do I post feedback?,"
"me too," "that was good," etc.) and sometimes with misinformation (such as posting
incorrect info to a question). I myself am guilty of making poor-quality posts
here.
I propose we change the forum model such that posts can be voted up or down.
The more highly voted posts will appear before posts which are not voted as highly.
Very large community-oriented websites such as Stack Exchange and Reddit use
this model to prevent spam and make favored content more visible. These websites
effectively moderate themselves by their own community. We have a very strong
community with good standards, and this feature would allow the discussion forums
to reflect that.
The aforementioned websites use a Wilson score for posts to prevent good but
unvoted posts from being invisible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval#Wilson_score_interval
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html
Currently, the message tree and forum front page show the newest posts first.
If the Wilson score is implemented, favorable content would appear first, while
users would still have the option to have newest content first. This reduces
flaming, abuse, inaccuracies, etc.
What does the community think?
|
I prefer the chronological tree that we have now for each thread.
The most favoured style works if there is one clear question and only one or
two correct answers. The discussions and opinions on this forum work differently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, New Hampshire
United Kingdom, England
Netherlands, Zuid-Holland