|
case22
Jan 30, 2002, 3:34 PM
Post #1 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 26, 2001
Posts: 204
|
I doubt that anyone will go for this, but I think that we should be able to see who voted for us on the q-ratings. I think it's pretty crappy that everyone's score can go down just because someone gets mad at them. Maybe this would make them think twice about giving a bad score to someone just because they're mad at them for something trivial. I don't know if it's even possible to be able to list who has voted for you, but I do think that it would only be fair.
What do you all think?
|
|
|
|
|
mauta
Jan 30, 2002, 3:45 PM
Post #2 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 11, 2001
Posts: 177
|
I agree,
I do not like anonymous votes.
But, on the other hand, i do not take very much into consideration that Q-rating. I have read excellent posts made by climbers with a low Q-rating.
JUAN
|
|
|
|
|
spank_spank
Jan 30, 2002, 3:49 PM
Post #3 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 480
|
Case22
I agree 100%. You piss off the slightest person. Then blam! your Q-Rating goes down. After thinking about it for a while, I don't care what my Q-Rating is, but it would be interesting to see who rates me. Then be able to confront that person. I can see many squabbles that would happen.
I know some people would be pissed at me
mmmmmmm... My Q is probably going down as I type.
|
|
|
|
|
spank_spank
Jan 30, 2002, 3:50 PM
Post #4 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 480
|
Case22 - I just gave you a big fat 0
Let me know if you have a problem with that!
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Jan 30, 2002, 3:57 PM
Post #5 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Ah yes, the paradox that is the Q-rating. Quality Rating turned highschool popularity contest.
It's not worth the effort to even consider the quality rating as a valuable piece of information in determining ones own "quality." Primarily the ones who don't like you will vote, and the ones who do like you won't. It adds for a significantly off balance number.
Oh well. Such is life in all its glory.
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Jan 30, 2002, 4:10 PM
Post #6 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
I previously voiced my concerns over this
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=5015&forum=14&12
Although it seems that some people are able to find out who voted for them and use that information as ammunition.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=5631&forum=32&start=30
[ This Message was edited by: wigglestick on 2002-01-30 08:15 ]
|
|
|
|
|
cass
Jan 30, 2002, 4:51 PM
Post #7 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2001
Posts: 1956
|
I gave someone an 8 once but for some reason their q-rate went down – which doesn’t make sense (although someone else could have given them a 0 vote afterwards), as someone said before, if you are going to vote at all, vote a 10, which I’ve decided to do in future.
|
|
|
|
|
jules
Jan 30, 2002, 4:59 PM
Post #8 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2001
Posts: 3099
|
I voice my opinions, which tend to clash with the majority. My rating goes down.
I agree with the masses on an issue, and it goes up. Huh.
I think that, the point of this site being to discuss climbing and the likes, a Q-rating is a relatively useless tool, though it had good intentions.
---------------
Wigglestick: I do not think that can fairly be considered "ammunition." Take into consideration that a well-known, highly rated (in both Q-rating and points) admin voted four times for another user, simply to bring his rating down because they do not get along well. So, of course, the defendant voiced his concerns in an effort to uncover this immature behavior. Then HE is considered the "bad guy", for fighting back.
Grrrrr, people make me mad.
((Excuse me, that person voted FIVE times.))
[ This Message was edited by: juliana on 2002-01-30 09:02 ]
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Jan 30, 2002, 6:39 PM
Post #9 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Thanks Juliana for rebuting wiggle's remarks.
I knew something was up, and I did what was in my power to figure it out, and I did. There were other people who gaves me a 0 or a 1, but I didn't say anything about it because they stayed within the limits of non-childish behavior and just voted. It's like stuffing the ballot boxes with BS ballots, illegal.
Anyways, blah blah blah. Q rating is ghey. But as long as its around, I guess we will all have something bitch and complain and argue about.
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Jan 30, 2002, 6:43 PM
Post #10 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
This is being addressed by admin.
Personally I would also like to see photo and Q-rating votes become visible.
|
|
|
|
|
paulc
Jan 30, 2002, 7:01 PM
Post #11 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2001
Posts: 464
|
I also think that q rating should be visible. But I think that one of the major problems here is that there is a group of people at the top that are in charge. Wait now hear me out, k?
If you look at /. as an example there is a group of people at the top that decide how things are going to be. They say that they don't get involved in rating comments, but that is BS. Now as people they are failable like some of the admins here. They make mistakes. They vote comments down. Just like here when admins decide that they don't like someone or what they said and vote or mod them down. This generates a lot of stress among admins and users, the users think that the admins are biased, and the admins think that some users are idiots. An aside to this system is that group think seems to dominate a lot more and we have seen it here.
Now look at K5. Everything except site functionallity is user decided. What stories go on the front page, what comments are modded up, what users get modded up. No one says that Rusty is biased cause he stays the hell out of deciding who or what is good or bad in terms of content and lets the users figure it out themselves. Now K5 is a much stronger set of communities than either /. or RC.com and I think that this is mainly because there are no admin type positions. There is less flaming/trolling. There is more user ownership of the site and that makes people happy.
Case in point. I replied to a newbieclimber troll, not really for newbie climber, but to correct someone (who shall remain unnamed). An admin had previously replied to newbie, but when admonished by someone and I decided to delete their post entirely. Now the thread doesn't make sense as someone and I are aaying that this admin needs to chill out, and the post that we are talking about is gone.
Now am not going to say that I haven't ever edited a post, but I usually say what it is I have to say and leave it. If I am wrong then I post back and say so, I don't change it so it looks like I know all of what I am talking about all the time.
People need to take responsibility for their words and actions.
Anyhow I think that Trevor et al are doing a good job, but a lot of the angst that users have here is due (I think) to the admins being human and screwing up every once in a while. The only way to get around this is to get rid of the admin role and let the users decide which content is good and which is crap.
Sorry for the long rant.
Paul
PS I'm not trying to get on anyone in particulars case, just trying to get a point across
Links:
www.slashdot.org
www.kuro5hin.org
|
|
|
|
|
woodse
Jan 30, 2002, 7:18 PM
Post #12 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2001
Posts: 625
|
I think it would be nice to see who votes, it would spur some great wars!!!
woodsE
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Jan 30, 2002, 7:27 PM
Post #13 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
I never said that using multiple bogus ids to lower someones Q-rating was ok. That is as stupid as invoking your admin rights in order to get to the root of your low q-rating. I think something is up with my q-rating too. Can I take the appropriate steps to examine it? No. By the way pianomahn, I gave you a 5. But you knew that already didn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
pushfurther
Jan 30, 2002, 7:36 PM
Post #14 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 2112
|
did somebody say low q-rating?
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Jan 30, 2002, 8:19 PM
Post #15 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Actually, no I didn't, because you weren't the root of the problem, and I didn't care. I investigated. Quite simple. If you feel that's shady, or stupid, keep thinking that. But there were some fallacies being spoken that I needed to confirm or deny. I used my resources. I didn't do anything wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
woodse
Jan 30, 2002, 9:14 PM
Post #16 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2001
Posts: 625
|
Children, children......
Hey I think the Q-rating was good in theory but failed miserably in practice. Why not just get rid of it? We are obviously not grown-up enough to handle something like that with it's ever-so-powerful capabilities. Can't we all just get along??
woodsE
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Jan 30, 2002, 9:33 PM
Post #17 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
I think one of the key reasons that the Q-rating has worked on other sites is that all votes are visible to everyone. This should prevent petty and vindictive voting.
I find it rather strange that people were so unable to handle this.
|
|
|
|
|
amethyst
Jan 30, 2002, 9:54 PM
Post #18 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 18, 2001
Posts: 113
|
I understand the concept, but it seems pointless - it is not going to be a true reflection of anyones 'worth'.
I have voted for a couple of people, but now I can't remember what I voted and why....I'm just slow, what can I say, Homer Jay is my hero!!
[ This Message was edited by: amethyst on 2002-01-30 13:55 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jules
Jan 30, 2002, 10:01 PM
Post #19 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2001
Posts: 3099
|
I give anyone I notice has a low rating a 10. I'll beat the system, dammit!
|
|
|
|
|
froggy
Jan 30, 2002, 10:04 PM
Post #20 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 4, 2001
Posts: 244
|
Why can't we see who voted for us? I think it is frustrating that we don't know who these mystery people are.
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Jan 30, 2002, 10:34 PM
Post #21 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Your rating is a 6.66 as I see it now.
Satan in da house!!
Would everyone please give me 0s? I want to see how low I can go.
|
|
|
|
|
metoliusmunchkin
Jan 30, 2002, 11:22 PM
Post #22 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2001
Posts: 1410
|
Are you serious?
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Jan 30, 2002, 11:36 PM
Post #23 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Yes, I believe so. I hold this number in no high regard, so lets have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
matt
Jan 30, 2002, 11:52 PM
Post #24 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 4, 2001
Posts: 1703
|
haha
I think I'm going to beat ya to that number pianomahn
I agree, might as well have some fun with it
|
|
|
|
|
pianomahnn
Jan 30, 2002, 11:58 PM
Post #25 of 41
(4094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2001
Posts: 3779
|
Dude, I have you beat by almost a whole Q point. There's no way you're going to beat me to the bottom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
