| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Downvoting
A while ago I came up with a (I think) reasonable system that voters would be split in 2 groups, anonymous & non-anonymous. The votes of the non-anonymous voters could be seen by everybody, those from the anonymous users not. The last group would then have a limitted range, let's say from 4 - 7 instead of 1-10.
I haven't heard anything about it since, but the reason I bring it up again is because it has come under my attention that 2 of my groupmembers have been seriously downvoted. And with serious I mean they (Sander & Jeroen Tel) both got a "1" twice.
I guess it can either be that some people who didn't have a clue how this board works voted so low by accident, or that they decided they didn't like the high rankings.
I guess it could also be that they really dislike the work of Sander & Jeroen but that I don't believe ;)
Either way I would like to know if the maintainers of this board already have thought up a solution for this problem. Because if you want to have a serious chart-system these things need to be taken care of.
Any comments? |
|
... 31 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Warbaby
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 60 |
I think non-anonymous voting would be great, because then a great musician like Jeroen Tel could see how many fans he has :) |
| |
anonym
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 267 |
Hi guys,
I dislike the downvoting here as well, but I am not quite sure that removing anonymous voting will completely change this behaviour, it might however reduce it a bit. Consider this:
- One could still create fake accounts (maybe even using existing handles of others) and downvote.
- Seen how a group was voted before, influences the vote as well.
For example I gave a rather high vote for X-ample yesterday (I believe it was 9), which was the fith vote that they got. They started showing up in the Group charts on rank one. A day later some else voted a lower vote for them, which made them rank sith.
So the previous votes and current rank will in one way or the other often influence how people will vote - but I guess it's not as bad as actually giving votes of 1 to a group just to put them further down in the charts.
It's actually rather interesting to look the group charts for example - for some of the groups it's rather easy to tell who was down/upvoted - just compare the amount of votes they got to the others.
What's my point? Not sure myself anymore ;-)
But I guess since making the votes public would eliminate part of the behaviour (and enable us to identify the culprits), it would still be a good idea.
/Frank |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Well, "downvoting" persee is not a bad thing .. meaning that if I, for example, see a group showing up in the top 10 that I don't like that much, but have not voted for, I'll probably go out there and give it a lower vote.
But there is a difference between a lower vote (like 5 or so) and an absurd vote (like 1).
As for fake accounts: if there's somebody unknown who keeps giving "1's" out, I guess it's very clear that that's a fake account, right? |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Ofcourse with "don't like" I mean their work, not the people in the group. Also I meant to say that this kind of downvoting gives a more realistic view of the scene's taste (as people tend to vote only for their favourites) |
| |
Perff
Administrator
Posts: 1679 |
I see this down/up voting is a problem that should be done something about.
As I'm in my 'improve CSDb'-mood I'd like to do something about it right away, but what do you think?
Should we make all the votes completly transparent?
Or should we do the anonymous - nonanonymous with the anonymous only being able to restricted ranges?
Feedback on solution ideas are welcome.
As to the talk about fake accounts we have been working on a way to detect if people are using fake accounts, so we are working on that area. |
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3053 |
Completely transparent. Whispering: but please erase my downvote for CreaMD ;-))))))) I wouldn't like to be accused of selfvoting ;-)) |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
I prefer complete transparancy as well, after all, we're all adults here, aren't we?
Yes, that was sarcastic.
Maybe if we can stop taking everything so damn personal it'll work.
Another idea by Jayce/Focus, in case of 2 groups of voters: weigh the votes of the anonymous users differently than the votes by the rest. |
| |
Jayce
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 39 |
Indeed weighting the votes with a dividekey between anonymous and registered gives downvoters less influence on actual score.
But a combination of both methods would be even beter, not being able to give extreme low and high points anonymous, weighting the votes and making it transparent
Not being able to anonymous downvote a person/group probally increases the number of registered users. But a fake user is easy to spot when the votes are transparent, and can be removed from the database.
Somehow all votingsystems involve people trying to cheat their way to the top (or bottom), has something todo with the primatestruggle to be number one i guess :) But that doesn't mean you can't make it harder for them to cheat.
|
| |
MagerValp
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1074 |
Err, wtf do you mean by transparent? |
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Transparant = see-through, meaning that if you vote, everybody will be able to see what you voted. Non-anonymous so to speak. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 - Next |
