[Motd] Ratings: a reminder | ANN.lu |
Posted on 08-Aug-2000 07:40 GMT by Christian Kemp | 10 comments View flat View list |
I just wanted to point out that the ratings should be used to rate the overall quality of an article (writing style, grammatical correctness, language, whether it is on topic and relevant, etc.), and not whether it is good news or bad news (ie. whether you like the overall idea of the news item).
|
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 1 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Vidar Sørensen on 07-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | Thanks for clearing up this for me! |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 2 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Graham on 07-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | But what about when the article has absolutely nothing to do with the Amiga? Surely such offtopic posts should get a low rating!
Conversely, poorly written articles that are basically a link to an article about the Amiga which is good should get a reasonably good rating, so that people will still follow the link to read the article, seeing that it is good.
I understand that there is a desire to have more articles/writeups/opinions and less of the links that lead people away from ANN, as that makes the site more interesting. Hopefully we wouldn't get Timothy Rue though... :-) |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 3 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Spudley on 07-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | Thanks. I hadn't really been using the ratings, because I wasn't really sure what criteria to rate it on. I might start using it a bit more now.
So... why not have two ratings? One for quality of writing; one for usefulness/importance of the topic.
Cheers!
Spudley!
( www.BadPuns.com ) |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 4 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Mike on 07-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | Sometimes I rated for relevance & somtimes for writing. Your clarification is good -now I am not confused!
As far as leaving the site via links, is it not possible to 'spawn' another window to visit the link ? I've seen other sites do this.
ttfn,
Mike |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 5 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by David on 07-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | In reply to Comment 4 (Mike): I was rating for whether it was good or bad news, like most people. I won't bother using them if it is just for editorial clarity. People like to have their say you know. If you wish to find out about the relative strength of a particular piece of writing you should probably use your own opinion, it is a bit too 'fascist' to ask everyone to rate each individual piece. |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 6 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Seehund on 08-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | Christian, I think it would be a good idea to replace 5="good" and 1="bad" with something like 5="Wow!" and 1="Zzzz...".
That way it would be clearer that it's the "quality" of the news (and not whether the news are positive or negative) that's supposed to be rated. |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 7 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Seehund on 08-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | In reply to Comment 5 (David): Don't you think that the way the ratings are intended to be used is more useful?
I'd much rather make up my own mind about whether a piece of news is "good" or bad", and if I see that several people who read the story before me think that a submission is well worth a read I know that it'll be easier for me to make up my own mind about the positivity/negativity of the news if I read that specific submission (maybe because it's clear, has good links, has insightful personal comments, provides other useful info or whatever). Or that the news are simply important - I'd give a three-word submission about Amiga Inc's bankruptcy a "5" even though such news would be truly tragic.
On the other hand I don't think the ratings are very important right now when not so many submissions are "concealed" behind a Read-More-link (or that the visitor can choose to display only submissions with a certain minimum score, á la Slashdot) so I tend to read all submissions anyway. It's not a painfully huge lot of submissions after all... ;) |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 8 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Trizt on 08-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | In reply to Comment 4 (Mike): Oh, thats terrible, I hate to have alot of browser windows open.
Have you tried to use the "open link in new window" function, atleast AWeb has it.
---
As most of the others, I have rated after how good/bad the news have been instead of writting a short comment that says "wow that was good", I tought it was to get ridd of those short meeningless comments that we got the system for.
If it's supposed to be for the writting, then I won't be using that system at all, except when people misses those '"' in the HTML-link in the posting, then I would like to have an option "-10", but anyhow I never can give them that as I won't see the page at all with this browser.
Maybe all HTML in the main post should be disallowed. |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 9 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 08-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | Maybe change it to
5 - interesting
1 - pointless
or
5 - yikes!
1 - so what? |
|
Ratings: a reminder : Comment 10 of 10 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Ketzer on 08-Aug-2000 22:00 GMT | In reply to Comment 9 (Johan Rönnblom): 5 - interesting
1 - pointless |
|
Anonymous, there are 10 items in your selection |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|