Negative ratings
Hi,
I think that the negative rating system on this forum can be enhanced this way: substitute rating (-1; not useful/wrong/offtopic) with (0; not helped/poor info in the question/...). When a post gets rated as 0 (zero) by three or even more members of the forum (probably with high positive personal rating) then it should be considered as really wrong or offtopic. And only after that its author should receive (-1). Of course, moderator of the forum must be able to unconditionally give negative rating.
I've noticed, that quite often negative rating of the message does not necessarily mean, that it contains absolutely wrong information or absolutely incorrect question. In most cases a negative rating is just an expression of someone's personal attitude to a poster or it is given "on the first thought" without deep analysis of the reply ( sigh-h, sometimes that applies to positive ratings too :( ..) ...
I wanted to be brief. That's it.
Regards,
Yuri Kuznetsov.
--
Added 02/05/00 01:48 pm from one of the follow-ups (YK)
--
Actually, I want to propose to substitute (-1) with, say, (-0.3) or something like that. Negative ratings should be accumulated separately from positive ones. Only the integer portion of the negative number should be shown and added to a posting's author "total score".
--
# 1 Re: Negative ratings
In my case, I use a negative rating most of the time to let the poster know that he's off-topic. Rating is faster than typing and for anonymous posters there's no other way to let them know.
# 2 Re: Negative ratings
That's strange. I can not rate anonymous posts... there's no such option available (no cbox, no button). Where, at last, that rating will be recorded for anonymous poster?
Well, if someone's post is off-topic then it should be not only a single person opinion.
Regards,
Yuri Kuznetsov
# 3 Re: Negative ratings
>> That's strange. I can not rate anonymous posts
You're right. It's not posible to rate anonymous postings right now. I don't know what I was thinking. Sorry for the mistake!
>> if someone's post is off-topic then it should be not only a single person opinion
That's true sometimes, but the more negative points a posting has makes it obvious for the author that a lot of people don't agree with his point of view or that he is off-topic. Obviously, everybody is entitled to his own opinion, and that works both ways: for the author of a post and the ones that rate it.
# 4 Re: Negative ratings
>> ... but the more negative points a posting has makes it obvious for the author
>> that a lot of people don't agree with his point of view or that he is off-topic.
I agree that above should be true ... in theory. But as practice shows, a posting almost never receives a negative rating from more than one person. Often, negative ratings are received in a form of a "chain reaction". A rated B with (-1), then B rates A with (-1) "in response" and so on. A and B may continue exchanging with negative ratings in different threads, sometimes spoiling "good" or "excellent" replies. Nobody will like to intervene in such "conversation" to state his/her own opinion, because there's a great amount of risk to be involved in that "chain reaction".
Actually, I wanted to propose to substitute (-1) with, say, (-0.3) or something like that. Negative ratings should be accumulated separately from positive ones. Only the integer portion of the negative number should be taken into account and added to a posting's author "total score".
A (0) rated (instead of (nr) ) postings (threads) will still attract attention of moderator/author/other members without hurting anyone. When (-1) pops out then it'll be obvious that really lot of people don't agree with the author's point of view. Again, moderator should be able to give "full" (-1) to obvious off-topics. The primary advantage is that there will be no possibility for "chain reaction" to develop.
Regards,
Yuri Kuznetsov
# 5 Re: Negative ratings
Well, what you're describing is childish behavior. There's nothing we can do to avoid that. I almost always use a negative rating to let the poster know that I think that his posting is off-topic. When I disagree with somebody's statements I will state my opinion in a reply. I don't care if some kid starts giving me negative ratings just because he's pissed at me.
# 6 Re: Negative ratings
I agree with Eddie and don't care about kids who give negative ratings. Eventually, they'll disappear or grow up !
The more mature should be patient with them.
Kailash
# 7 Re: Negative ratings
It's OK, guys.
I've started this thread most because sometimes it looks a little funny (?ridiculous?) for me when I see people (not kids) throwing bad ratings to each other with a speed of a machine gun (it's so easy to do). Any way, I think those people don't feel themselves good after such "exchange".
Of course you've been with this forum much longer than I am. You think that the current system of negative ratings should be left "as is". Maybe it does make sense ...
# 8 Re: Negative ratings
I didn't state my opinion so far, because i was just looking at the progress of this issue.
I agree completely with Yuri (and you seem to fail ACK'ing :), thought that childish thing will never disappear. You should note that rating a post often means thread is over (when positive) or still didn't (when negative). -0.3 ratings would avoid, IMHO, some of that child behaviour, as a -1 rate would require more people's same opinion.
You should note also that sometimes it's the question that isn't correct.
Regards,
--
Nuno Tavares
http://nthq.cjb.net
# 9 Re: Negative ratings
In my opinion the whole point is that this is a voluntary discussion system, where nobody is obliged to give an answer. The people who answer are not elected representatives where they are duty bound to give a correct answer and solve all the woes of the person who asked the question. They spend their own time and effort to help the other person and when in pure stupidness the person does not even understand the meaning of the answer, and gives a negative rating, it irks.
Why should voluntarily spending time and effort to help somebody automatically give that person a right to pass judgement on me? If you find something wrong written in a book, criticize it, because you have paid for it.
I think that:
1. Anonymous postings shud be disabled.
2. Negative ratings should be disabled.
3. There shud be direct way to report an extremely offensive or obscene reply to the moderator, so he can take appropriate action, like deleting the post, or disqualifying the poster etc.
Raghav at 2007-11-10 3:46:48 >
# 10 Re: Negative ratings
My opinion on the subject is:
1) Anonymous post should be disabled,
2) The rating system is almost ok (I'll elaborate on this later, I'm very busy right now! ;-)
3) If anonymous posts are disabled, it's posible to ban annoying posters (offensive, obscene, etc)
Eddie
# 11 Re: Negative ratings
Let's use the post in this forum that has the subject "click an line function". It was posted by someone new to dev-archive. I think the person is German and is doing the best he (or she) can to communicate with us. Two people gave the post a negative rating. When I saw it I was not sure what the reason was for the negative rating, so I made a reply.
The point is that a person might not have any idea why they are getting a negative rating. Most of the time they would have an idea, and many times they do not want to hear an explanation, so we cannot satisfy all requirements with just one solution. The example I gave I think is an example of when it is better to explain to a person what the problem is. I disagree with the statement that ratings is the only way.
[b]There are other ways.
# 12 Re: Negative ratings
>1. Anonymous postings shud be disabled.
Agree.
>2. Negative ratings should be disabled.
Sometimes they are useful. I think they should remain enabled but whoever wishes to give a negative rating should (somehow) have to explain it.
>3. There shud be direct way to report an extremely offensive or obscene reply to the moderator, so he can take appropriate action, like deleting the post, or disqualifying the poster etc.
How about private messages to the moderator? How could it be more direct than that?
Nick A.
# 13 Re: Negative ratings
We are very emotional about this topic, don't you think?
I don't think we should wipe out "Anonymous" posts. I did post 6 answer for quite some time without login - so I got used to the forum, and created an account only when I felt a certain point of "security" (well security is an illusion, I know), and "attractiveness" of the site, knowing I drop by regulary.
I think we - as a community - are able to cope with some "childish behaviour". It's the easy to build a fence and keep strangers outside. It's a harder task to teach them.
I'm emotional about neg ratings myself - I never caught a neg rating yet, but I know I wouldn't like it. (It would spoil my total ;~)
I suggested a real "zero rating". No extensive math, just to let the other one know "Sorry, but this didn't help", without going to attack. Neg ratings should still be possible, since often enough there are real "off-topic" or "useless replies.
We should see rating as it is intended - as a tool to quickly find out if there's an answer or not. I would not blindly ban all violines just because I don't like the thing my neighbour does to them.
3. It's easy to filter "flame hot spots" - just look for high number of replies, or high negative rating sum. I think a mail should be enough. I have no experience, how Mr. Archer react on this - but if he doesn't, a direct reporting system wouldn't help either.
Regards,
Peter
