|
A 3 is neutral in the fact that it doesn't give negative or positive reputation points, but if a post has already got one vote of 5 and you give it a 3 then you are bringing the average down to 4, so effectively downgrading the 5. Similarly, if a post has a vote of 1 and you give it a 3 you are upping the average.
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is perfectly fine. In this case it is an answer in QA and if the OP felt it did not resolve the problem, the average should go down. In any case it should not hurt the member posting the answer. I would not object if I answered a question and received a 3-vote.
Had it been an article, you could argue that it hurts the author to have the average rating lowered even if there is no change in points. I do wish Code Project would change the 3-vote on articles so you don't have to leave a comment. There are people who take offense to getting 3-vote as this thread shows.
Soren Madsen
|
|
|
|
|
I went through all 5 of your questions and did not find any comment where someone was complaining about your vote. Could you link to it please?
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure of him, but if you need an example, have a look at this: http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4439694/My-vote-of-3.aspx[^]
After I saw this thread, I checked my history and did find this at exact datetime:
29 Nov 2012 8:49 PM -10 Author Article Downvoted Article How to extend a WPF Textbox to Custom Picker
I too was under assumption that 3 is neutral, but it looks like it has a different(context based) interpretation. 
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this is an old bug 'reincarnated'. I remember when voting was first introduced 3 did result in a negative vote. Chris fixed it but now it looks like it is back.
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently this post[^] has been flagged as spam (at least) 36 times, but it's still there. Aren't they supposed to be removed after a certain number of reports? (The account was closed though, so it looks like it's working there.)
modified 30-Nov-12 11:32am.
|
|
|
|
|
Now at 51!
Bob Dole The internet is a great way to get on the net.
 2.0.82.7292 SP6a
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bug squashed
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
What happened? Some counter error? Some kind of database error?
Bob Dole The internet is a great way to get on the net.
2.0.82.7292 SP6a
|
|
|
|
|
OK, gather round kids and I'll tell you a story...
Our reputation system grew quickly from a simple system that awarded points for posting articles to a system that was very fine grained. The initial code to award points was baked into the stored procedures that created articles, but as it grew we found we were mixing two patters: one which baked calls to the rep system into the sprocs, and one which used our modular code system that listened to "events" that occurred and would react appropriately.
When we moved our reputation system from a site-centric to network-centric system we, by necessity, had to pull out all the code in the sprocs and move them into message handlers (ie do it properly). We have 77 rep events and dozens of event handlers and we got a few of them cross-wired. However, since I had turned off ratings in the forums, this had masked the issue, because the rating and reporting systems were connected (again, another TODO: untangle them).
It was a straight out bug on our part, and it's the same bug I'm fixing, Friday night, bottle of red, to ensure points are awarded when you edit a Quick Answer question or answer.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be possible to switch up how reporting deducts points?
Right now, abusive reporters can cost ~100 points without much reprieve from the poster. Would it be possible to only apply the negative points AFTER the post has been deemed as spam/abusive?
It would prevent individuals from doing far more damage than a single one-vote.
|
|
|
|
|
Good idea. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
That's a great idea, and yes, that's actually going to happen.
Right now I don't have the resources or time to do this, since it involves a fairly fundamental, but very, very much needed change.
In the meantime, however, I've simply set the points you lose to zero. This will take effect soon.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Awesome. Will this be retroactive or just for future reports?
|
|
|
|
|
So, I got my answer to the prior question.
But now, I have one more question. Regarding the 800+ points lost from people abusing the reporting feature, is there any way to overturn those?
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew Rissing wrote: But now, I have one more question. Regarding the 800+ points lost from people abusing the reporting feature, is there any way to overturn those?
They'll be back the next time a full recalculation is done. This may be done concurrent with the change, or might wait until more changes are queued up: The recalc takes a while to complete and often results in "where did my points go?!?!?!11eleventyone1" posts from people who see their total when the calc is only partially complete and panic. 
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
This is the advantage I have of being ignorant...
... Of my points. I never know if I have gained or lost points.
|
|
|
|
|
The only way to do that is to undo all the reporting events. And no, I'm not going to do that. If certain high-level members want to abuse this site, and the members who use it, then the only option I have is to just open up the reporting system so it's clear who's being counter productive.
But no - I'm not going to play Big Brother and decide what abuse report is right and wrong. Sorry, that's just impractical and unpalatable.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Understandable. Thanks for responding to my request.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. just wow! Does this mean if you just whine enough, it'll be set straight. Is this how this place works? Feel free to cancel my account in this case. I don't think I want to belong to that kind of community.
"All animals are created equal"
Addendum:
"Some animals are more equal than others."
Bye. bye, And take good care lest this place degenerates completely!
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
Manfred, honestly, the staff at CP can do what they want to do. If they don't reset them, fine. My life continues.
I find the problems experienced today saddening because it doesn't build community, but rather detract from it - when people do things out of spite rather than a 'community spirit'.
You can do whatever you feel is necessary, but I think you need to step back from the keyboard and relax.
If you don't care about anything other than your 'Authority' points, that is your prerogative. Then just resign to enjoy the parts of the site that you care about - Q/A. But for most people, that isn't the case.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't quite get what is you problem:
1. Andrew made a good suggestion to improve the site, which Chris will implement.
2. Andrew asked that points which were abusively taken from him be set back, which seems to me a perfect valid request.
If you'd care about reputation, and I would halve yours just for fun, wouldn't you be glad that the CP Team reinstates it to its original level ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think that's what happened here.
The suggestion is to only deduct the points once the post is actually removed for being spam.
I personally feel that's a good suggestion, the uni-voter (or uni report voter) will lose his 'power' and the posts that really are spam will get enough votes to have the points deducted.
I'm pretty sure Chris wouldn't just put points back unless it is actually the right thing to do. No matter how much anyone whines.
I still don't get the whole obsession with the points but hey that's just me I guess.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
