3 ms·
I agree that ideally I should provide alternatives. However, I honestly thing that the kind of tweaking that is currently happening has no visible benefits but
by sfk 17y ago
I agree that ideally I should provide alternatives. However, I honestly thing that the kind of tweaking that is currently happening has no visible benefits but a lot of drawbacks. I simply do not /see/ any alternatives.
Also, I'm of the opinion that voting generally should not be tampered with. Either count every vote or drop voting
altogether.
- lsd5you 17y agoApostasy! Anyway, the problem is not the policies as such, it is the lack of explanation/feedback. Depending on the nature of the heuristic employed, feedback could perhaps be given in a users profile or during the action of voting (or even merely a single, central explanation of the heuristics employed). (Personally I am neutral on the issue).
- rewind 17y agoI think (and I can only guess) that part of the process of testing is just doing things based on what Paul wants to see, then determining if the results meet his goals or not, but without having to ask permission from the user community or tell them everything that's going on. Just the fact that he's testing at all would indicate that he's keeping an eye on whether his tests are giving him the desired results. If not, I'm sure he'll keep iterating and trying new things. I can certainly appreciate your frustration, and I'm not just brushing that aside, but I think for anyone (yourself included) who has been here awhile, it's obvious that Paul is always trying new things, and ALWAYS to make the site better, so it's just a matter of dealing with the changes as he makes them with an understanding that everyone has the same ultimate goal. If he makes changes without announcing them, it's just a quirk that members of the community need to be aware of, and just learn to live with.