evaluating posts with stars

[Maciej]

Hi,

I wonder what is the sense to evaluate questions (first posts in each
discusion), as there is a well-know rule, there are not stupid
questions, only answers can be and thus -- in my opinion -- only them
should/could be evaluated by readers. What do you think ?

Regards,

Maciej

 

[Andrew Thompson]

Maciej wrote:
...

I wonder what is the sense to evaluate questions (first posts in each
discusion), as there is a well-know rule, there are not stupid
questions, only answers can be and thus -- in my opinion -- only them
should/could be evaluated by readers. What do you think ?

Since these 'star' ratings that you refer to are a
Google Groups invention, and not visible to either
people who use standard news clients or other
web interfaces to usenet, I feel the users of Google
groups should completely ignore the post ratings
and leave posts unrated.

GG users are not generally of a level of technical
understanding that they should be the 'judges', in
any case. Most of the longer term posters to these
groups (and also more experienced with Java), use
a dektop based rich client to access usenet, and
generally express anything needs expressing,
in their replies.

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.athompson.info/andrew/

Message posted via JavaKB.com
http://www.javakb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/java-general/200708/1

 

[Lew]

Maciej wrote:
...

Since these 'star' ratings that you refer to are a
Google Groups invention, and not visible to either
people who use standard news clients or other
web interfaces to usenet, I feel the users of Google
groups should completely ignore the post ratings
and leave posts unrated.

GG users are not generally of a level of technical
understanding that they should be the 'judges', in
any case. Most of the longer term posters to these
groups (and also more experienced with Java), use
a dektop based rich client to access usenet, and
generally express anything needs expressing,
in their replies.

Why do people even care about these "stars"?

Seriously, why do they care?

 

[Patricia Shanahan]

Why do people even care about these "stars"?

Seriously, why do they care?

You seem to be assuming they do care. Why assume that?

Patricia

 

[Thomas Hawtin]

GG users are not generally of a level of technical
understanding that they should be the 'judges', in
any case. Most of the longer term posters to these
groups (and also more experienced with Java), use
a dektop based rich client to access usenet, and
generally express anything needs expressing,
in their replies.

It's worse than that. I haven't looked recently, but the rating systems
seems to be used maliciously by the odd active users. "Surprisingly" a
poster with clearly incorrect information can get a high rating, but
regular technically respected posters can in the same thread be rated
poorly.

Tom Hawtin

 

[Lew]

You seem to be assuming they do care. Why assume that?

That's a leading question. I see no reason to assume it when there's evidence
from which to conclude it. I assumed nothing.

 

[Twisted]

You seem to be assuming they do care. Why assume that?

There's evidence that some people do. Some people rate posts on GG;
some ask here about the ratings and start threads like this one...

 

[Twisted]

GG users are not generally of a level of technical
understanding that they should be the 'judges', in
any case.

That's a blanket judgment and as such guaranteed to be false.
Technically knowledgeable GG users can and do exist.

Most of the longer term posters to these
groups (and also more experienced with Java), use
a dektop based rich client to access usenet, and
generally express anything needs expressing,
in their replies.

Most. Some don't have that luxury, e.g. because none of the broadband
providers in their area provides an NNTP service.

Stop collectively denigrating GG users. It's rude and unhelpful.

 

[Andrew Thompson]

...
It's worse than that. I haven't looked recently, but the rating systems
seems to be used maliciously by the odd active users. ...

This is very true. I have had malicious posters 'following
me around' marking my posts down in the GG 'rankings'
system. Just look at some of the odd ratings (in the sense
of a single low rating of one innocuous and technically
specific reply to threads consisting of many replies), and
it seems obvious something funny is going on.

Because I can post a far greater volume than they
can manage to bother to rate me on, generally it
does not affect me that long, nor beyond being
mildly irritating, affect me that much.

..."Surprisingly" a
poster with clearly incorrect information can get a high rating, but
regular technically respected posters can in the same thread be rated
poorly.

I have to grin when I see a Spam post with a single
five star rating.

Since GG does not yet seem to offer ranking
searches by star ratings, searching the archive
using GG should be relatively unaffected, though,
and hopefully any regular user of GG sees enough
idiotic ratings to decide to take them with the *huge*
'grain of salt' (treat them with suspicion) they deserve.

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.athompson.info/andrew/

Message posted via JavaKB.com
http://www.javakb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/java-general/200708/1

 

[Twisted]

This is very true. I have had malicious posters 'following
me around' marking my posts down in the GG 'rankings'
system.

Likewise. Probably we all have.

 

[Andrew Thompson]

Maciej wrote:
..

...there is a well-know rule, there are not stupid
questions, ...

As an aside. 'Well known rules' are often also wrong.
There is great value to asking a 'smart question'.
<http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.athompson.info/andrew/

Message posted via JavaKB.com
http://www.javakb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/java-general/200708/1

 

[Eric Sosman]

Why do people even care about these "stars"?

Seriously, why do they care?

Help me out here: Who are these "stars" you speak of?
Beverly Sills, perhaps? Alfredo Kraus? Birgit Nilsson? I
make no apology for caring about them, dead though they be.

 

[Andrew Thompson]

[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]

Seriously, why do they care?

Help me out here: Who are these "stars" you speak of?

*

Beverly Sills, perhaps? Alfredo Kraus? Birgit Nilsson? I
make no apology for caring about them, dead though they be.

* While I am relatively confident that was purely the
lead in to a joke, I will choose to interpret it more
literally and provide this link for the benefit of anyone
who has never seen a GG star rating, and is curious..
<http://www.physci.org/test/gg/star/img.html>
( I went looking for examples on the very thread you had
posted, but at this stage just one post was ranked, many
times... )

--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.athompson.info/andrew/

Message posted via JavaKB.com
http://www.javakb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/java-general/200708/1

 

[Joshua Cranmer]

<http://www.physci.org/test/gg/star/img.html>

Interesting rollover. Also a mild touch of irony in that screenshot...

 

[Joshua Cranmer]

Interesting rollover. Also a mild touch of irony in that screenshot...

And I just realized: IE said that there were JavaScript errors on that
page. Firefox just reported several mis-parsed CSS entries.

 

[Eric Sosman]

...
I wonder what is the sense to evaluate questions (first posts in each

[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]

Seriously, why do they care?

Help me out here: Who are these "stars" you speak of?

*

Beverly Sills, perhaps? Alfredo Kraus? Birgit Nilsson? I
make no apology for caring about them, dead though they be.

* While I am relatively confident that was purely the
lead in to a joke, I will choose to interpret it more
literally and provide this link for the benefit of anyone
who has never seen a GG star rating, and is curious..
<http://www.physci.org/test/gg/star/img.html>
( I went looking for examples on the very thread you had
posted, but at this stage just one post was ranked, many
times... )

Hunh. Well, ya larn sump'in new every day. One thing
I haven't learned is how to see these stars: Andrew's IE
apparently gets them, but my Firefox doesn't. It does show
star ratings applied to authors of posts though -- but by
whom, or how, remains a mystery. Maybe if I had an account
with Google Gr-- hey! Do you suppose this might be a lure
to get people to give Big G their contact information, so G
can tell them exactly what to do to avoid doing evil?

Ah, silly me: There's a rip in my tin foil helmet.
I'll be all right again soon's I fix it.

 

[Ben Phillips]

Help me out here: Who are these "stars" you speak of?
Beverly Sills, perhaps? Alfredo Kraus? Birgit Nilsson? I
make no apology for caring about them, dead though they be.

More recent than that. I prefer Stephanie Swift...

 

[JohnT]

Seriously, why do they care?

Or you can just do like I do... set up a score of -9999 (or what ever
your newsreader can do) and poof... all the google gropers disaapper

 

[Lew]

Or you can just do like I do... set up a score of -9999 (or what ever
your newsreader can do) and poof... all the google gropers disaapper

My newsreader doesn't have any concept of "scores" or "stars" for posters, so
that's sort of moot here.

Even if I used GG and was cognizant of "star ratings", I'd still be bemused by
the attention people pay to them.

 

[Twisted]

Or you can just do like I do... set up a score of -9999 (or what ever
your newsreader can do) and poof... all the google gropers disaapper

How evil. Most of us are perfectly ordinary usenetters. Discriminating
against people based on their site of origin is bad. So is
discriminating against people on the basis of socioeconomic status (or
to put it more simply, money), and tarring all google groups users
with the same brush is doing that as well, since it's the only source
of free usenet access for some of us. You let all people with money
escape your discrimination but not some people without money.