LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > LinuxQuestions.org > LQ Suggestions & Feedback
User Name
Password
LQ Suggestions & Feedback Do you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 08-02-2011, 04:23 AM   #1
Snark1994
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2010
Location: Wales, UK
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 1,632
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345
Reputation system


I was just wondering what the purpose of the two separate ways to give reputation are for. Just now, I was posting on a thread (which wasn't my own) and another user gave me some comments on a better way to do what I'd done in my code. I found this helpful, and so clicked on the "I found this post helpful" button.

However, on reflection, this could cause it to show up as the post people have marked most helpful in the thread, while it has little relevance to the actual question.

Is this the difference? That the "Rep" button is for adding reputation for 'off-topic' posts, while "I found this post helpful" is for marking posts which are helpful with regards to the question asked? Or is it something else, like "for historical reasons"...

Thanks,
 
Old 08-02-2011, 04:49 AM   #2
GazL
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 3,960
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363
It's all a bit of a mess now. The helpful yes/no pre-dates the rep system. A 'yes' will assign some rep, but that's a side effect. If you really want to give the other person some rep points for helping you they will get twice as much by using the rep system directly.

I was in favour of the helpful yes/no system when it was first proposed but sadly people misuse it to such an extent that I don't think it works as intended..
I always saw the helpful yes/no as a comment on the content of the message posted and not on the person posting it. I'm not in favour of the per user "helpful" statistics on each members stats page or the rep system itself which make comment on the individual user rather than the individual posting..


Personally, I find it much more satisfying if someone takes the time to post a 'thankyou' and would be happy to see both the rep and helpfulness systems yanked.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 05:25 AM   #3
druuna
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,532
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387Reputation: 2387
Hi Snark1994,

It is a long read but this thread might give you a good look at both: LQ Reputation System

Hope this helps.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 06:59 AM   #4
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Debian Testing
Posts: 19,191
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 468Reputation: 468Reputation: 468Reputation: 468Reputation: 468
Moved: This thread is more suitable in LQ Suggestions and Feedback and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

Think of the Yes/No as a way to point readers towards the solution - it is meant to show the most helpful post and make things easier for anyone coming afterwards to find a solution quickly; you get rep points for that.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 08:51 AM   #5
MrCode
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Oregon, USA
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 864
Blog Entries: 31

Rep: Reputation: 148Reputation: 148
Maybe an idea would be to get rid of the "Helpful? Yes|No" thing in /General, as it seems to be sometimes used for purposes of "praising" posts that other members thought were "funny" or that agreed with their position on some issue (e.g. bickering about LQ rules, posts in political/religious threads, etc.), rather than genuinely rating posts as "helpful" in a useful context.

My .
 
Old 08-02-2011, 09:41 AM   #6
jeremy
root
 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 11,815

Rep: Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055Reputation: 3055
A couple comments:

* As noted, the Helpful system is meant to rate the quality of a post (and its content) while reputation is in a member context.
* The Helpful system has been disabled in General (and other non-technical fora) since its inception.

--jeremy
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-02-2011, 09:49 AM   #7
MrCode
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Oregon, USA
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 864
Blog Entries: 31

Rep: Reputation: 148Reputation: 148
Quote:
The Helpful system has been disabled in General (and other non-technical fora) since its inception.
…oh.

My apologies, then; I thought I saw those in /General, but I guess I'm confusing sections (the thread I linked to is here in LQ S&F, not /General ).

My point about abusing the "helpful" system should still be relevant, though…I think. :-\

Last edited by MrCode; 08-02-2011 at 09:51 AM.
 
Old 08-02-2011, 12:31 PM   #8
GazL
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 3,960
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy View Post
A couple comments:
* As noted, the Helpful system is meant to rate the quality of a post (and its content) while reputation is in a member context.
And yet:
Quote:
GazL Has Rated 155 Posts
GazL's Posts have been rated good 283 out of 294 times.
LQ Helpful Quotient: 96%
... Is clearly a judgement on the member not the post.

I think this is the bit I dislike most. A 'no' has impact outside of the scope of the individual post. I don't like the idea of helping to brand someone as unhelpful just because I disagree with a specific posting, and as such I don't use the 'no' option except in extreme circumstances. Some others aren't as considerate and will click no at the slightest thing. I've seen threads recently where it has generated bad feeling.


I'm used to being branded 4% unhelpful now though, so I mostly ignore it,


What would be interesting to see is a
"GazL is on n users ignore-list" statistic as that would be interesting feedback for some

Last edited by GazL; 08-02-2011 at 12:32 PM.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-03-2011, 03:47 AM   #9
Snark1994
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2010
Location: Wales, UK
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 1,632
Blog Entries: 3

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345
Thanks for the comments / links / moving the thread :P

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy View Post
As noted, the Helpful system is meant to rate the quality of a post (and its content) while reputation is in a member context.
Sorry, could you clarify exactly what "a member context" would be? Is it, as has been suggested, when you approve of a post but the post does not contribute to the answering of the question?
 
Old 08-03-2011, 05:00 AM   #10
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Debian Testing
Posts: 19,191
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 468Reputation: 468Reputation: 468Reputation: 468Reputation: 468
The reputation system is related to the member, the helpfulness to the post. If you believe a post is helpful, whether it solves the problem or not, you would click the "Yes" (or "No" if you believe the post to be terrible. The best ranked post is then flagged beneath post#1. The reputation system is to flag the member as helpful - as you gain "age" on the board, more and more of your posts will be noticed and you will be seen as a helpful member, then people will increase your reputation.

In both cases, there are no prizes except for a warm fuzzy feeling and boasting rights at your local bar.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-03-2011, 01:23 PM   #11
GazL
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Posts: 3,960
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363Reputation: 1363
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
Some others aren't as considerate and will click no at the slightest thing.
And here's a good example: Now seriously, did gnashley deserve a 'not helpful' recorded against his stats for that?
 
Old 08-03-2011, 01:37 PM   #12
sycamorex
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: London
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 5,797
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182Reputation: 1182
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
And here's a good example: Now seriously, did gnashley deserve a 'not helpful' recorded against his stats for that?
or this thread.
 
Old 08-04-2011, 05:34 AM   #13
Snark1994
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2010
Location: Wales, UK
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 1,632
Blog Entries: 3

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345Reputation: 345
Brilliant, thanks once again, XavierP.
 
Old 08-24-2011, 10:25 AM   #14
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 6,729

Rep: Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328Reputation: 2328
This thread is a very, very clear case of not-helpful ratings being abused. Galen marked as "not helpful" any reply that didn't support his clearly stated agenda, regardless of how valid it might have been; even the post XavierP made when he closed the thread! In a follow-up thread, Galen gave as his reason: "I don't find personal attacks to be helpful", which means, in context, that he wanted to punish people for pointing out his pattern of behavior. He didn't dispute the accuracy of their information; he wanted to punish them for supplying it.

The follow-up thread also shows that other people have started abusing "not helpful" ratings to retaliate against him.

Last edited by dugan; 08-24-2011 at 10:30 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LQ Reputation System jeremy LQ Suggestions & Feedback 1086 03-27-2011 01:31 PM
LQ Reputation System is now in BETA jeremy Linux - News 51 10-20-2010 07:26 PM
Do you think the reputation system should be used on this site? joeBuffer LQ Suggestions & Feedback 39 09-04-2009 09:10 AM
LQ User Reputation System jeremy LQ Suggestions & Feedback 55 12-10-2008 08:06 AM
Reputation System cs-cam LQ Suggestions & Feedback 45 01-07-2006 10:47 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:39 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/lq-suggestions-and-feedback-7/reputation-system-895048/
www.linuxquestions.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-30
122909
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:B5X6EO7MUCUD4MA5SXV55DCV5PPHUO7H
<urn:uuid:f087e593-c9c5-49d6-bf00-cf04bcd15d63>
2016-07-29T18:39:29Z
75.126.162.205
sha1:U4DA7CRFDSQNNLW3K77RA323JZPSRD3B
<urn:uuid:bdf80673-b07e-47c4-ad47-53d891952022>
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/lq-suggestions-and-feedback-7/reputation-system-895048/
length
response
<urn:uuid:888d2d55-0ec3-4cf5-86d9-7690bcd33ea4>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-185-27-174.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-30
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for July 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf