6 ms·
I think a good system would be to have just two voting axes: 1) "worth reading" / "not worth reading" 2) agree / disagree Then add a system of whatever flags
by Pistos2 17y ago
I think a good system would be to have just two voting axes:
1) "worth reading" / "not worth reading"
2) agree / disagree
Then add a system of whatever flags you think are necessary, like "spam".
I treat the current voting arrows as if they meant (1). I vote up things that I think are worth other people's time to read; vote down things that are a waste of time to read. I very rarely downvote. In some cases where others might more liberally downvote, I simply don't vote.
- mtts 17y agoI treat the voting arrows as if they meant (1) as well, and in addition to that, if something is at 0 or worse and isn't in fact a waste of time, I'll vote it back up. Downvoting something you disagree with kills a discussion, IMHO.
- kburn 17y agoEven then, I think the scores for each should be bifurcated so that people can see the number of "worth reading" vs. "not worth reading" votes, and the same for agree/disagree. I think the practice should at least be modeled liked a number-line. The default is 0, neither an upmod or downmod. Just as it is, an upmod (or +1) should be given if the post was particularly interesting (not agreeable, interesting), and a downmod (or -1) should be given if the post was particularly non-interesting (not disagreeable, non-interesting). I think too many people only see the world as either +1/-1 with no option to just leave a comment alone.
- Pistos2 17y agoTo be clear, I thought it went without saying that marking agreement or disagreement would not count towards the worth-reading score, and that the two arrow pairs would not be accumulated into a single score. Two scores would have to be displayed, perhaps giving users the option of seeing only the worth-reading score.