On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Hannes Magnusson <hannes.magnus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ok. But why then all the different options? > If a note is flagged, the expected outcome is for an admin to delete > it - after verifying that the note is broken. > There isn't any reason for the user to jump through hoops and buttons > to tell us why, we need to read the note anyway. > In my mind, that means flagging is another way of "mark as bad note".. > which effectively is what a note with down votes is too, and the end > result is the same; note removed. > > > -Hannes
I understand what you're saying and I've been back and forth about whether or not they're both worthwhile or not. However, I can't find a compelling reason not to include this additional features. It serves a slightly different need for the user. The ability to feel like they communicated their express opinion to a moderator. Whereas voting is meant to be handled by an autonomous system. Voting is a quantitative gauge of what the community thinks about the notes on any particular page of the manual. With pages that have a lot of notes it might not be worthwhile for the user to have to read through all of them. Most people like to just browser the top two or three notes unless they're looking for something specific. This means it'll be easier to spot which ones the majority of users agree are useful. I guess the pace at which notes accumulate in the manual now is pretty sluggish. Voting might make community interaction quicker, but I of course we don't know by how much yet. My take on it was that voting something down might have a slower response time for some pages than others. Not every page in the manual is frequented often and again I suspect the desire for some users to feel like they got through to a human might be needed there. Of course, my suspicions may be completely wrong. :)
