Up/Down Voting: what's up with your crazy % formula??

[anonymous alias]

first i had 1 up and 1 down.... with a total score of 50%. okay, makes sense.

then later i see that i have 2 up and 1 down. my score goes to 75%

Overall Post Quality Score: 75%

Up Votes
   Total Up-Votes Received: 2
   Unique Posts Receiving Up-Votes: 2
   Individual Members Who've Up-Voted: 2
   Posts Currently Positive: 1

Down Votes
   Total Down-Votes Received: 1
   Unique Posts Receiving Down-Votes: 1
   Individual Members Who've Down-Voted: 1
   Posts Currently Negative: 0

WTF? how do you get that?

not that i care about this voting scheme; its obviously meaningless.

I just wonder how some Comp Sci folks figured out that 2/3 = 0.75

[William Hemsworth]

I don't see your point, (2 / (2 + 1)) = 0.75, which is correct (edit, or not..).
Or, (Number of up-votes / Total number of votes)

[Ezzaral]

Might want to check that...

[William Hemsworth]

Might want to check that...

Ah :P Now I see her point, my bad.

[anonymous alias]

wow.

now i have 2 up and 2 down... and with zero net pos or neg threads, each of them is obviously canceling out each of the other.

now, you cant get any more straight-down-the-middle than this.

Yet, somehow, 2/4 = 37%

Overall Post Quality Score: 37%

Up Votes
   Total Up-Votes Received: 2
   Unique Posts Receiving Up-Votes: 2
   Individual Members Who've Up-Voted: 2
   Posts Currently Positive: 0

Down Votes
   Total Down-Votes Received: 2
   Unique Posts Receiving Down-Votes: 2
   Individual Members Who've Down-Voted: 2
   Posts Currently Negative: 0

LOL

this is a joke. I mean, seriously, did anyone here take any math classes in college?

or are are you contracting Third World autistic kids to write your code?

[Narue]

>this is a joke. I mean, seriously, did anyone here take any math classes in college?
It's a fair assumption that the points are weighted somehow. Are you interested in an answer or are you just here to bash things you don't understand? Because if it's the former, being a jackass is a good way not to get an answer.

[anonymous alias]

previous threads on this topic have the powers-that-be insisting that the up/down score "doesn't matter".

so if it really doesn't matter, then why is it such a cryptic process?

[Narue]

>so if it really doesn't matter, then why is it such a cryptic process?
If it really doesn't matter, why do you care whether it's "cryptic" or not? Let's call a spade a spade and agree that you think this feature matters, you care about your score, and you want to understand how it works. Clearly the feature is written for people like you. You care enough to know that it's written well and completely, so it was (probably) "cryptically" designed to be useful for people like you while also preventing abuse.

Once again, I'll speculate that the points are weighted in the calculation. But if you're going to attack Dani (since I assume she's the one who wrote it) at every turn, she's more likely to ignore you as a troll and use her time productively.

[anonymous alias]

you care about your score,

no. not as a metric with any meaning. I'm quite prepared to have my score asymptotically approach zero; anonymous aliases tend to go that way

and you want to understand how it works.

yes, i would like to understand how 2/4 = 0.37.

Once again, I'll speculate that the points are weighted in the calculation.

i agree it seems obvious. but why?

But if you're going to attack Dani at every turn,

i don't know Ms Dani. if she's anything like other founders of successful web communities that have become stable and mature, she probably now has others do the grunt work for her.

she's more likely to ignore you as a troll and use her time productively.

indeed. battling trolls is more suited for volunteers. keep up the good work

;)

>so if it really doesn't matter, then why is it such a cryptic process?
If it really doesn't matter, why do you care whether it's "cryptic" or not? Let's call a spade a spade and agree that you think this feature matters, you care about your score, and you want to understand how it works. Clearly the feature is written for people like you. You care enough to know that it's written well and completely, so it was (probably) "cryptically" designed to be useful for people like you while also preventing abuse.

Once again, I'll speculate that the points are weighted in the calculation. But if you're going to attack Dani (since I assume she's the one who wrote it) at every turn, she's more likely to ignore you as a troll and use her time productively.

Ouch! That told you mate. Careful with the old feedback. Here be tygers - and they don't like negativity! Why aren't you a party member? God-cursed seditionist as you are - I shall denounce thee. If you don't change your name to Stepford you'll regret it.

I can't see the point of the system myself. You'll find the top dogs either saying it's not impt, so "shut up" and stop worrying OR or it's very useful and nobody else except yourself is bitching about it, so "shut up".

Some of use got killed by the 'downvoting script' recently. If the system was of any use, those downvotes would have been wiped by now.

Watch my rating plummet as unconstrained vitriol is released via mouse click.

IDGAF

[Nick Evan]

Some of use got killed by the 'downvoting script' recently. If the system was of any use, those downvotes would have been wiped by now.

I can assure you that this is still a topic of debate "behind the scenes" and it will be dealt with. It's just a pain in the ass to find out who were involved, who got downvoted, who made the bots etc etc.

[Narue]

>no. not as a metric with any meaning. I'm quite prepared to have my
>score asymptotically approach zero; anonymous aliases tend to go that way
That's odd, because people who don't care tend not to bitch and moan like you've been doing. :)

[Dani]

> it was (probably) "cryptically" designed to be useful for people like you while also preventing abuse
Yup :)

> But if you're going to attack Dani (since I assume she's the one who wrote it) at every turn, she's more likely to ignore you as a troll and use her time productively
Yup :)

> if she's anything like other founders of successful web communities that have become stable and mature, she probably now has others do the grunt work for her
Nope :)

[jbennet]

> it was (probably) "cryptically" designed to be useful for people like you while also preventing abuse
Yup

Ha! It got abused to hell!

p.s fix my rep :)

[Ancient Dragon]

You shouldn't feel so bad

Overall Post Quality Score: 34%
Up Votes
Total Up-Votes Received: 899
Unique Posts Receiving Up-Votes: 776
Individual Members Who've Up-Voted: 268
Posts Currently Positive: 62
Down Votes
Total Down-Votes Received: 6509
Unique Posts Receiving Down-Votes: 1481
Individual Members Who've Down-Voted: 40
Posts Currently Negative: 906

If you do the math, 72/968 = 6%, not 34%

[~s.o.s~]

/me takes off the super-mod hat

> Here be tygers - and they don't like negativity

If someone treats the responses to all the threads in the Feedback forums as some kind of global conspiracy, then that person is seriously messed up in the head. :S

> You'll find the top dogs either saying it's not impt, so "shut up"
> and stop worrying

You forgot the obviously implied, "a newly introduced feature still under development". Oh and BTW, `dogs' is way too derogatory, I'm sure you had a better word in your dictionary, you just didn't use it. Subtle sneaky stabbers FTW. :)

/me puts on the super-mod hat ;)

[Ancient Dragon]

. Oh and BTW, `dogs' is way too derogatory, I'm sure you had a better word in your dictionary, you just didn't use it.

"Top Dog" is a common expression here in USA that means the boss or the leader. It is never meant as a derogatory term, but more of a compliment.

"Top Dog" is a common expression here in USA that means the boss or the leader. It is never meant as a derogatory term, but more of a compliment.

Thanks AD.
Separated by a common language I guess.

For the record:
I do not think daniweb mods are bad, in fact, quite the opposite. However, I do think that there is a pack mentality (no dog pun intended!) or tendency to over-react when a criticism is levelled at some facet of the site, usually on this forum. I understand that trolls deserve a bit of rucking, but it sometimes looks like a feeding frenzy.

[~s.o.s~]

> "Top Dog" is a common expression here in USA that means the boss or the leader

I'm very much aware of that expression but was expecting "brass" instead of "dog", hence that smiley. :-)

> I do not think daniweb mods are bad, in fact, quite the opposite

Good to hear that, thank you.

> tendency to over-react when a criticism is levelled at some facet of the site

I'd like to clarify this a bit; it's not just criticism against the site, but nonconstructive criticism/trolling in general which gets thrashed. Let's take an example of the very first post of this thread.

WTF? how do you get that?[...]
not that i care about this voting scheme; its obviously meaningless[...]
I just wonder how some Comp Sci folks figured out that 2/3 = 0.75

Now how about:

I currently have two up and one down votes but my total score quality comes out to be 75%? Is this a mistake or part of some weighted calculation? Can someone shed a bit more light on how this entire voting thing works? No bothered, merely curious. :-)

See the difference?

Mind you, not that a bit of sarcasm and drama is bad or anything, it's just that sarcasm begets sarcasm, trolling begets trolling. You get what you ask for, plain and simple. :-)

[VernonDozier]

You shouldn't feel so bad

If you do the math, 72/968 = 6%, not 34%

But if you do the math this way:

776 / (776 + 1481) = 34%

So that works for you at least...but not other people. Reverse-engineering a formula might be an interesting math problem.

As to the larger problem, you can only give rep to an individual once a day. If they made the up/down the same way, that might limit the havoc.

[sknake]

As to the larger problem, you can only give rep to an individual once a day. If they made the up/down the same way, that might limit the havoc.

That would effectively make votes the same as rep. I noticed she did put a 15second delay in there for casting votes. I had to modify my program for downvot... i mean... i had to slow down my clicking.

Is Dani going to clean up those down votes?

[Nick Evan]

Is Dani going to clean up those down votes?

Yes. But the 'when' is still a bit of a mystery.

[Ancient Dragon]

Yes. But the 'when' is still a bit of a mystery.

I assume she has a lot of other higher priority things to do than devote a lot of time/effort to something like this.

[Narue]

>I assume she has a lot of other higher priority things to do
>than devote a lot of time/effort to something like this.
Those "conferences" that she uses to decide our fate without our input seem to be one such example. :icon_rolleyes:

[Ancient Dragon]

>I assume she has a lot of other higher priority things to do
>than devote a lot of time/effort to something like this.
Those "conferences" that she uses to decide our fate without our input seem to be one such example. :icon_rolleyes:

I might agree -- but a business (DaniWeb) is not a democracy where all the employees (members of the forum) get to vote on how the business (DaniWeb) is run. Nor do we own shares of voting stock in DaniWeb. We can always vote with out feet if we don't like the way DaniWeb is run.

[Nick Evan]

I might agree -- but a business (DaniWeb) is not a democracy where all the employees (members of the forum) get to vote on how the business (DaniWeb) is run.

I might agree -- but you're forgetting that this business wouldn't even exist without the help and time of some dedicated volunteers (like yourself). So I think major lay-out changes and/or changes in functionality could at least be discussed with people who come here daily and put in a lot of effort and time to make this site work. I don't think that's asking too much, do you?

[Dave Sinkula]

I assume she has a lot of other higher priority things to do than devote a lot of time/effort to something like this.

http://www.daniweb.com/twitter/tweet246053.html
:icon_razz:

[donut_gal]

"cscgal: Need to work more on the DaniWeb homepage remake but taking a break to exercise on the treadmill ... I ate too many donuts this morning!"

LOL

So, the truth has been uncovered. Dani eats donuts all morning then takes to the treadmill at night.

What exactly does she do all day? All y'all have been brown-nosing, but how about truly asking the question that's on everyone's mind-- Dani, what the hell are you so busy doing that you can't do your actual JOB, and maintain daniweb?

[twomers]

"cscgal: Need to work more on the DaniWeb homepage remake but taking a break to exercise on the treadmill ... I ate too many donuts this morning!"

LOL

So, the truth has been uncovered. Dani eats donuts all morning then takes to the treadmill at night.

What exactly does she do all day? All y'all have been brown-nosing, but how about truly asking the question that's on everyone's mind-- Dani, what the hell are you so busy doing that you can't do your actual JOB, and maintain daniweb?

While this was probably Josh his point is undeniable... I hate to say it. How long has it been? Two weeks? And what has been done? 15 second limit?

[sknake]

What exactly does she do all day? All y'all have been brown-nosing, but how about truly asking the question that's on everyone's mind-- Dani, what the hell are you so busy doing that you can't do your actual JOB, and maintain daniweb?

Thats a little over the top..... Sure we like to moan when she breaks our favorite features but I wouldn't go so far to say she isn't doing her job. I don't think any of us really understand what she has to do to keep this site going