|
I think you should be rewarded for starting a thread that grows to certain lengths. Even if what you originally posted was crap and got downvoted to oblivion.
For example this[^] original post was complete nonsense, but it caused a great deal of activity and enjoyment to follow. The original poster should be rewarded for initiating that.
I am sure that there are similar examples in the programming forums where a stupid question, suggestion or comment stimulates sensible and interesting discussion of some length, as well as healthy use of the site.
This, I firmly believe, would be a good idea.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. I used to rate posts by their response size before voting came along. I prefer it in many ways because even IF a post gets downvoted, the fact it stimulates discussion is merit worthy.
==============================
Nothing to say.
|
|
|
|
|
Erudite__Eric wrote: I used to rate posts by their response size before voting came along
How can you rate something before we had voting? Also, we've had voting for nearly a decade. 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: How can you rate something before we had voting?
By number of replies.
Chris Maunder wrote: Also, we've had voting for nearly a decade
Not in the SB (and it wasnt in the lounge as far as i recall).
==============================
Nothing to say.
|
|
|
|
|
So, size does matter. 
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
|
|
|
|
|
Chris, I just realized that 1-votes would make the perfect gift for the CPian who has everything. In particular, you could establish a Community Service Award for members who make outstanding contributions to the site and go out of their way to help other members. The CSA would be accompanied by 100 free 1-votes, so the CSA winner would be able to zap those pesky retards that keep bugging him with questions.
|
|
|
|
|
The only way to post in site bugs / suggestions should be by paying $1 per post (you get $5 for implemented suggestions and confirmed bugs that were not yet reported).
Somebody in an online forum wrote: INTJs never really joke. They make a point. The joke is just a gift wrapper.
|
|
|
|
|
Around here, Care in the Community[^] would be more apt.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.
Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H
OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre
I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
|
|
|
|
|
Chris, I've already had to buy more 1-votes twice today. This is getting aggravating; I can't keep up with John.
Can you set up something in member settings so my 1-votes are replenished each time I log in? Of course, this will mean you will also have to persist my credit card number.
|
|
|
|
|
I've FedEx'd you a box of them.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
There's a question[^] at the C# forum where I disagree with Pete O'Hanlon. (No, I did not beat the swordmaster[^])
The pain is here; initially, one only has the option to call the answer a "good" or a "bad" one, only later we get to grade it on a scale. I did not read the question very well, disagreed with Pete. Still, I'd like to be able to vote some post a "3", as in, "requires clarification".
Where did the rationale to limit the rating originate from? I'd even settle for expanding the "good" and "bad" option with something like "tell me more".
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
|
|
|
|
|
Black and white not good enough for you? it used to be 1-to-5 everywhere, and then that suddenly was considered too difficult for some. Go figure.
I have opposed that change from day one, to no avail. Even downvoting has been threatened, so we may yet be left with just " I like".
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: it used to be 1-to-5 everywhere, and then that suddenly was considered too difficult for some. Go figure.
I heard if the iPhones' success already.
Luc Pattyn wrote: I have opposed that change from day one, to no avail. Even downvoting has been threatened, so we may yet be left with just " I like".
For the love of bacon, this is a programmers site and as the newsletter proclaims, we as programmers, need options[^].
Seriously; it doesn't feel right to downvote someone simply because you disagree.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: it doesn't feel right to downvote someone simply because you disagree
There are no feelings involved.
When IMO a reply is wrong, inappropriate, misleading, lacking essential information, not touching the crux of the matter, in short: anything but really good, what I do is provide my reply (provided I have one); and possibly also cast a vote, which could be anywhere between 1 and 5 when those possibilities are offered. If only good/bad are available, I will sometimes click "bad" when a "2" or "3" would be adequate (it isn't just "1" that turns into "bad"), and I will typically NOT click "good" when it doesn't deserve a "5". Luring people into voting "good" for so-so answers doesn't work with me.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: There are no feelings involved.
Excuse me, but when an apprentices' gut says he should do his homework, chances are..
Luc Pattyn wrote: If only good/bad are available, I will sometimes click "bad" when a "2" or "3" would be adequate (it isn't just "1" that turns into "bad"), and I will typically NOT click "good" when it doesn't deserve a "5". Luring people into voting "good" for so-so answers doesn't work with me.
Yup, I could go for that. Would always require an explanation on the motivation of the rating, of course.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
The good news is that you will soon be able to buy as many 1-votes as you want. Even better, with the paid 1-votes, you will be able to 1-vote a post as many times as you like (until you run out of 1-votes, of course).
|
|
|
|
|
There is no obligation to vote, and the option to ask for clarification is present.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC Link[ ^]
Trolls[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
I don't feel a need to ask for clarification on an answer to a question that wasn't mine to begin with, unless the subject would happen to be very relevant to me. A reply should be clear and correct; if IMO it is wrong, then it is considered "bad".
And I am inclined to vote on things I have spent time on, i.e. the relevant messages in a thread that I have read and thought about. The voting system should not be such that it dissuades or refrains me from voting.
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: There is no obligation to vote, and the option to ask for clarification is present.
That's true, it just puzzled me that I could only mark it as "bad". It's not consistent, and although I've seen it often, it bugged me not until now.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
|
|
|
|
|
When in doubt, don't vote...seriously. You don't have to vote. Instead, leave a question/reply/comment.
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: When in doubt, don't vote...seriously
I did not doubt; it was an incorrect answer as far as I was concerned, and I wanted to mark it as such. Partly, the result was as desired; the answer was no longer marked in green, indicating that it was not agreed on by everyone. It became nice green again after I corrected the vote.
Slacker007 wrote: Instead, leave a question/reply/comment.
Sounds like a good strategy to avoid arguments and downvotes. Doesn't fit me, though.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Doesn't fit me, though.
Doesn't always fit me either.
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
There has been a lot of posts recently about univoter stalkers, etc. Let's face it: when John gets rolling about the IQ level of QA posters, it's fun to bitch-slap him with a 1-vote. But this can obviously lead to less-benevolent uses of the 1-vote, so here is my proposal: CP starts selling 1-votes for 10 for a dollar. So when you get 1-voted, you can feel good that you have helped CP's financial situation. Of course, 1-voting will also be seriously diminished. Who wants to spend money on such nonsense?
It's a win-win all around!
|
|
|
|
|
OK, that gets my 5 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Use your 50 1-votes wisely. 
Somebody in an online forum wrote: INTJs never really joke. They make a point. The joke is just a gift wrapper.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
