System of upvotes: Suggestion

[deltascrow]

I have a suggestion regarding the upvoting of post replies system on Daniweb. Suppose I have 10 posts which have been voted on, in all, and in those ten posts, 9 have been voted up and there is one post which has been voted on twice, one up-vote and one-downvote. In such a case, in my member profile, number of posts voted up field as per the present system shows 10 and the number of posts voted down shows 1. The post quality is now <100% even though the one post voted down has been voted up by someone else and the overall rating of that post is zero. My question is, should a post which has been rated down by someone, and then rated up again by someone else, (making the net rating zero) affect the overall posting quality of a Daniweb member? I think posts with a net rating of zero should not be considered in the overall posting quality.

I have another suggestion to make regarding the same, and this suggestion is regarding this same system; however, it is not a change that I would like to propose here, but a bug I've spotted. Consider the example given in the former para. Now, on the profile, n(posts voted down) is one, but when I, for example, click on the "View posts voted down" button, the post is not displayed because its net rating is zero. Please resolve this - I believe the modification I have proposed in para one would be a good solution, because storing the details of upvoted and downvoted posts for each member separately would take up too much space.

[JorgeM]

I think posts with a net rating of zero should not be considered in the overall posting quality

I assume that this has not been implemented because if it was in place, anyone who receives a downvote can simply register with a new account and upvote the downvoted post. It would be an easy way to get to 100% using this process.

[deltascrow]

What about the second question? And it isn't as if a post is going to receive only a single downvote, sometimes posts receive multiple ones. The pros outweight the cons, IMO.

[Ketsuekiame]

I agree with JorgeM, allowing that would make it a pretty easy system to beat.

Don't worry too much about your metrics unless they're really bad :)

[deltascrow]

No, I'm asking about the bug (see para 2)

[deceptikon]

I think posts with a net rating of zero should not be considered in the overall posting quality.

Just because the post has a net rating of zero doesn't negate the fact that it has votes applied. Your suggestion would take the value of votes away such that you'd be saying "someone disagrees with your vote, so your opinion doesn't matter".

Now, on the profile, n(posts voted down) is one, but when I, for example, click on the "View posts voted down" button, the post is not displayed because its net rating is zero. Please resolve this

I'll look into it, but I suspect it's more of a timing issue as the update propagates through the system. If you check back after a day and it's still not correct, let me know, because that's way too long.

[deltascrow]

Just because the post has a net rating of zero doesn't negate the fact that it has votes applied. Your suggestion would take the value of votes away such that you'd be saying "someone disagrees with your vote, so your opinion doesn't matter".

Sigh. Yes, I guess you are right here...

If you check back after a day and it's still not correct, let me know, because that's way too long.

It has been 2 and a half days, my friend. And this is not the first time I have noticed this. I was on DW earlier too, and had about a 300 posts, when I stopped using that account for some reason and started afresh... In fact, I had even asked the moderators to delete that account but that was not just possible. Moreover, ironically, I had stopped using that account because someone was using some sort of a script to down-vote my posts.

[deceptikon]

It has been 2 and a half days, my friend.

I guess I'll do some code diving then. ;)

[deltascrow]

Please do inform me when the problem will be solved. :)
I'm marking the thread as solved, though, btw.

[deceptikon]

Please do inform me when the problem will be solved. :)

I can't make any guarantees or estimates yet. A quick test on my end shows the response to be immediate. So the problem is intermittent, and that makes it much harder to troubleshoot. :(

[deltascrow]

Umm, I think you should downvote a post, and then make someone else upvote it. It won't show in either place, "Buttons voted up" or down. :S Or seriously, idk. I just reported a bug.

[deceptikon]

Umm, I think you should downvote a post, and then make someone else upvote it. It won't show in either place, "Buttons voted up" or down. :S

Yes, because neither post is currently positive or negative in that case. That's intended behavior, the up and down voted posts lists aren't for any post that has had a corresponding vote at some point in its history, they're for any post that presently has a positive or negative rating, respectively.

[Dani]

Now, on the profile, n(posts voted down) is one, but when I, for example, click on the "View posts voted down" button, the post is not displayed because its net rating is zero. Please resolve this

This is by design. The button is intended to show you posts that currently have been voted down (i.e. have a net vote < 0) as opposed to all posts that have ever received a negative vote.

[Atli]

Sorry to jump in on this old thread, but I figure it's better than creating a new one for the same subject.

I'm wondering if there is any way to see what has actually been down-voted, regardless of the balance? I ask because I'd like to be able to see what people are voting against, if only for the ability to double check the posts for mistakes. - With this curious annonymous voting system you have, the fact that you have one up vote to cancel out the down vote doesn't really mean anything. The down-vote could be from somebody who knows better and spotted something the up-voter didn't.