|
Anyone can make their votes non anonymous. Just reply to the person with the number you voted. They can click on you and see who you are.
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >></div>
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I haven't read all the replies yet.
However, here is my opinion:
1) Personal (i.e. not anonymous vote) may actually be a good thing.
2) Nobody mentioned this, but a middle ground could be that you need to provide reasons for your downvote. This should be a dialog with a large listbox at the top and an auto-complete combo at the bottom, so that common down vote reasons would come up immediately(sorted by popularity, i.e. if many people put in the same reason...).
3) Anonymous voting makes the creation of claques a lot easier, running the risk of heightening the popularity of someone who does not necessarily deserves it.
The other side has merit, too: anonymizing the vote means that I feel more free to vote as I please instead of having to defend my reasons.
I am hence much more favourable to non-anonymous votes.
A
The old developer from Hell.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a long-time CP member. Back when we had the 1-5 voting scheme, I voted on posts a lot. I eventually realized I was using net anonymity as an excuse for bad behavior. My New Years resolution that year was to never vote on a post again. If I like what someone says, I comment on it. If I disagree, I comment on it. No anonymity, and much less bad behavior on my part. I feel like my karma has improved somewhat.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
You're a good man, Gary.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Chris  .
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
If you choose to stick with the anonymous path, you could make the person doing a downvote enter in a reason for it and feed it back to the poster.
|
|
|
|
|
No.
People who want non-anonymous voting in any arena are always those who seeks to control the outcome. If you cannot handle the critics and the trolls then do not put yourself out there for them to come at you... this is not complicated stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Rowdy Raider wrote: People who want non-anonymous voting in any arena are always those who seeks to control the outcome
I disagree with that generalised statement completely.
Some do, some don't. Read the comments of others.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I defy you to provide one motivation which does not align with my statement.
|
|
|
|
|
I would suggest two separate voting systems: one anonymous, fast, without any comments, and a more complete option, like a review, with the score plus suggestions/criticism.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps there's a new category.
What's called up/down votes today becomes something more like opinions, which are public and must be backed up with some explanatory text. (Maybe only for downs, what didn't you like?).
Then, a simple like/dislike category for those who have only a nebulous feeling, or don't want to get into the muck of the why they feel some way.
That might give an overall measure of popularity, plus some details for those who are inclined to provide them.
|
|
|
|
|
How about a different option?
Leave voting anonymous but require a reason to be given when down voting.
|
|
|
|
|
Would it be fine to have an option of a small check box to let the voter select if s/he wants to show the name or not
|
|
|
|
|
Sad to see how firmly the fascist mind-set is entrenched in the minds of our "smart young men".
Have you ever wondered why "real" votes are anonymous?
Have you pondered the fate of Brendan Eich?
Note: "Debate" is where people argue an idea back and forth - "posting" and "commenting" in this context.
"Voting" is what people do when they want to signal their approval, or not, of something.
"Voting" is generally considered to be a "Yes/No" action.
Only a fascist believes that it is reasonable, or even possible, to browbeat someone into changing their vote.
|
|
|
|
|
A RAID disk walks into a bar.
Bartender asks what's wrong.
"Parity error."
"Yeah, you look a bit off."
|
|
|
|
|
There are 10 kinds of people who understand that joke.
|
|
|
|
|
newton.saber wrote: There are 10 kinds of people who understand that joke.
I don't get it. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, sorry. There are only 2 types of people.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
|
I seem to be the 11th one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually 11rd.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
There are 16 kinds of people who understand that joke?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't care who you are that there is funny!
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.1 new web site.
I know the voices in my head are not real but damn they come up with some good ideas!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
