score the thread itself via a rolling average.
Also having the data allows for some fun stuff later. For example it
should be easy to have a "slider" type button bar on each thread that
allows a browser to display only items in the thread ranked higher than
a certain point. Kind of a "only-lean-to-all-the-fat-o-meter" Unranked
messages would either get an "unranked" or a zero.
You may start (as you are) with a simple solid color code: but with more
data you could make a small "growth chart" of each thread: a good thread
which tailed off and descended into crap would being with a bright green
(perhaps wide) line and trail off to a black, thin line (as a vine
withering) while a strong, interesting thread would stay green and
strong throughout.
Another benefit of the message ranking opposed to thread ranking is that
you could use it to suggest/search for posts by the same (high-ranking)
people.
I would also consider giving props of some kind to the thread
originator. Somebody who isn't good at answering questions but has an
ability to ask questions which often result in "2" answers should be
somehow marked.
In general (in my opinion) the more data the better. Capture EVERYTHING
- you may only build a simple system to start with, but the more data
you have the more you can do with it later. I would capture who made
the rating, when (with rater time zone if possible), how long their
session was at the time (at least how many pages they had viewed),
whether they searched for the thread or not (and what the term(s) were),
etc.
Not to complicate it, but it may be nice to have more than one meter as
well. A thread which is off the subject (but not the forum) topic may
still be a "2" (but harder to find). It would be nice to rate the
message on several (but not more than, say, three) points: relevance and
quality come immediately to mind.
Personally I find the technical (on topic) debates to be some of the
most satisfying threads. In general I would never throw the fine art of
debate into the same category as "fighting". ;^)
Lastly, just to plant a bug, one thing that may also be very nice is the
ability to cross reference directly in the rating. For example a
question that gets asked (and answered) a lot could be rated as "been
there, done that" with the regulars adding a link to the original
thread. We could just put a link in the message, of course - but then
you couldn't track it as easily. You could then present a "most
referenced" top list as well (and it should help searching quite a bit
if used).
Just some thoughts,
Jim Davis
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 2:10 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: voting
If a system was implemented to allow people to vote on the relevance of
a thread
in a list (mainly in the tech lists), would it be better to vote on the
entire
thread or on just a message in the thread? I'm thinking something like:
must read 2 points
important 1 point
neutral 0 points
off topic -1
fight/debate -2
The problem is that there are some members of CF-Talk who can turn a
technical
thread with an average score of 1 or 2 into one with a negative score
rather
easily. Do we penalize the entire thread because of these people or do
we want
people in some way.
The idea is for people coming to the front of the archive to have a
color coded
clue as to what threads are really important and which ones can be
avoided.
Most everything in CF-Community would be -1 or -2. :)
More 'avoid pain' work.
--
Michael Dinowitz
Finding technical solutions to the problems you didn't know you had yet
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
