|
Great feature, but you should not count same people downloading same file multiple times as separate downloads. Currently - it registers multiple downloads of the same file by the same person as separate downloads.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
there's really nothing they can do about that unless they keep track of the date/time the file was downloaded by that person, and then checlked to see if the downloadable file was newer. It would be a moderately-sized logistical nightmare. Beyond that, they'll probably do a recount and catch up all of the older downloads as well. How would you back-track it then?
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
I do not know what info they keep. But from my viewpoint - all they need to do is to maintain a list of users downloading a software for each article. If a user downloads for the same article again, the author should not be getting points for it.
Nick Polyak
modified on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 3:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Why? Really, who cares other than the author?
|
|
|
|
|
people should be prevented from increasing their score indefinitely. yes, even authors
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Why? If an author significantly enhances a piece of code which the user redownloads, why should they not get rewarded? You're onto a loser here; opinion is definitely against you.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you misunderstand, currently simply by re-downloading the same file, the author can increase his score.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think the author gets any points if he downloads it. Plus, there are daily caps on points, so he or she would have to be really dedicated to the cause. Finally, points don't actually get you anything so what harm does it do?
|
|
|
|
|
I downloaded it twice - I got 10 points. I do not want to test the daily limit, because I do not think it would be fair.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
and btw, if you think the points do not matter, why not cancel them at all at code project?
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I've been away for a while. I think this is an excellent idea. All that should matter about an article is, is it good or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Roman emperor Claudius (who was not considered one of the brightest emperors) once said he does not care about the court procedure he just wants to punish the guilty and reward the innocent. Sorry, but your statement reminded me of that. There is no way to determine who is guilty and who is innocent without a court. There is no way to figure out which article is good and which one is not without some reasonable ways to score them.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Points awarded for articles are never shown on the articles themselves. All that's shown is how members rate them.
The points are personal encouragement for the members.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, this is true, but when I see a member with a lot of "author" points I know that his articles are probably worth reading.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
I am in favour of a system where people only vote to say an article is worthwhile. That way the voting games on articles are removed.
|
|
|
|
|
This is something Hans and myself have discussed. My one problem is that an "out of 5" voting system makes it very clear, at a glance, what the consensus is on an article, whereas a value of N thumbs-up just gives you an absolute number with no context. Is 10 good? 100? 1000? What if 10 people liked it but 1000 people didn't?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
It's always going to be a judgement call for the reader, but perhaps if the emphasis is moved to views and usefulness you could achieve the same, e.g. 10,000,000 people viewed this article and only one found it useful. With the voting games, good articles can be swamped by downvotes of people who are just trying to boost their own articles in the initial two weeks. It's all very well saying that good articles will recover, but they will only do so if they are seen and this is something that becomes problematic when a quick couple of downvotes knocks them off the first page on the day of release.
|
|
|
|
|
I am kind of proud of my recent PRISM articles and happy that they received a bunch of votes, bookmarks and quite a lot of downloads. The good reception (which increased my score) is definitely a motivator for me to write more articles.
I have not experienced the "voting games" as you called them, but if they do happen, perhaps the site can require that those who vote 1 should explain themselves. Another solution can be that negative outliers are not counted in until they constitute a sizable percentage of the votes.
Nick Polyak
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Polyak wrote: those who vote 1 should explain themselves
Already in place
Nick Polyak wrote: negative outliers are not counted in until they constitute a sizable percentage of the votes.
We have played with this extensively and there is a very small, but real problem of negative votes from a true expert who may know the topic better than the author being completely hidden due to more popular votes.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure about historical downloads, but keeping track of who downloaded what when shouldn't be too hard, considering you must be logged in to download anything.
|
|
|
|
|
What about if a new version of the same file is uploaded?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
It does not matter, it can be per user per article or it can be per user per version per article. More important to prevent the ability to download the same file by the same person indefinitely.
Nick Polyak
modified on Tuesday, May 3, 2011 12:16 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the catch. That tawdry WINKS LONDON ... they have been manhandled off the site.
As a side note, bless your heart for wandering around the Press Releases. There aren't many people who would dare enter that wood.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest, to show only one update entry per day/author on the home page.
An advanced mode could be, to group the daily author updates into the latest/newest entry.
[Edit] Trick/Alternate(s) should also be grouped.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
