[thesite] voting for articles

[Warden, Matt]

On Oct 5, isaac had something to say about RE: [thesite] voting for articles

>> how are you going to stop multiple ratings from the same person?
>
>How do we stop that now?
>
>Hint: we don't.

per user account we do.

and that's really all we can do.

>My suggestion would be that we could discourage this in the name of fairness
>and honesty. 

The honor system is nice. but as we start creating more and more incentive
to create good content for evolt (average total rating, cubes, etc.),
there's the side effect of competition which could pursuade someone to
pump up their own article.

>We could also understand that ratings, however nice and useful,
>are not insanely critical. We would weigh up:
>
>	more ratings, lower purity
>
>vs
>
>	few ratings, higher purity

so, now we're encouraging fewer ratings?

>Obviously, our current situation does *not* guarantee purity, nor do
>anonymous ratings necessarily lead to a lowered purity (that is, more junk
>ratings).

hmmm...

>I would not expect much variation in purity level, but would definitely
>appreciate the increase in ratings.

I disagree. Unless, of course, people are already creating junk users to
do this.

>They could potentially enter a bullshit email address and then a junk
>rating, but they can do that now. *shrug*

to be fair, the system discourages this by the way its set up. sure, it
can happen, but it's less of a temptation than "heres a field we're never
gonna use again for identification, and here's wher eyou rate" that what
you suggest implies.

see alistapart.com's forum. that's not a community. that's a question and
answer session.

part of a community, i think, is making the individul recognizable and an
entity. how many communities do you know where the people change their
appearance and names all the time? how would that foster relationships
among members?

part of the point, especially with comments, is to say "oh, well isaac
hates everything having to do with XXXXXXX, so i'm going to ignore his
comment about it" and stuff like that.

not, "oh here's this name i've never seen before... do i nkow
them? hmm.. well, since i have nothing to gauge on, i guess i'll take this
comment at face value".

back to accountability and all that.

so, officially, that's a -1 from me in the "anonymous rating&comment
department. though, i'm totally down with making it easier for registered
members to comment.

thanks,


--
mattwarden
mattwarden.com