Bob Burd wrote:Change from a 1-10 system to a like/dislike system.
Change all current 10 votes to likes.
Change all current 1-6 votes to dislikes.
Drop all remaining votes.
Bubba Suess wrote:Would the page score simply be the number of likes received or would there be other criteria? Would a 'like' by someone with more power weigh more than someone with little power?
Matt Lemke wrote:Likes/Dislikes should then be anonomous...seeing who voted on your pages is absurd
Bubba Suess wrote:Matt Lemke wrote:Likes/Dislikes should then be anonomous...seeing who voted on your pages is absurd
If someone disliked my page, I would like to know who it is. This was a problem early on in sp's history and public voting was instituted to remedy anonymous dings. Granted it is less important in a like/dislike system but it should remain public.
Bob Sihler wrote:I've been talking with Matt about voting and other changes as well. Instead of muddying the discussion, I'll stick for now to the voting. Here is what I sent Matt in an earlier email:Matt,
What I meant by the 10% thing is that 7/10 would be 70%, 8/10 80%, and so on.
A like/dislike system like the one Bob Burd suggested sounds simpler to implement.
* Would this be the end of vote weight? Many bigger contributors might not like that their say counts as much or as little as someone who just signed up and has done nothing for the site. I can't, however, think of any way to preserve vote weight under such a system. Perhaps, as has been suggested in the past, the more points you have, the more times you can vote in a given time period. But that might be difficult to implement.
* How would current votes be converted? I would suggest making 7-10 convert to "Like" since 7 is "pretty good." Or perhaps 7 should be considered neutral while 8-10 are "Like" and 1-6 are "dislike."
* How would this affect page score? Personally, I don't put much stock in scores except for the very low ones. After all, Mount Rainier is going to get way more hits and votes than an excellent page for some obscure desert peak. In other words, I don't think a high page score necessarily means the page is better than many others, so I wouldn't be upset to see actual scores go.
* To elaborate on my idea about a threshold for voting, I would set it at a number of power points equivalent to what one gets for a mountain page and a route page, which are the heart of SP's content. Of course, there are other routes to getting to that total, but it seems a reasonable minimum contribution and might ward off a return of the avatar games. Furthermore, I would disallow points for gear reviews. Many know that you can do a cut-and-paste "review" and get points for that; there are a few members who have high vote weight due almost exclusively to it. Those are not true contributions to SP, and gear can always be discussed just as well in the forums.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests