Site Issues, Updates, Changes, and Feedback Thread

[mansr]

1 minute ago, Ralf11 said:

so reputation = creation "science" ??

Well, reputations are created.

[wgscott]

32 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Frankly, based on what we are seeing, I think the display of such tallies should be ditched.

 

Although I agree with your conclusion, I think you are very wrong about Mans.  He is one of the most genuinely knowledgeable and helpful people here.

[AudioDoctor]

Hmm, how many reputations do I have?

 

I am slacking it seems.

[davide256]

Just now, AudioDoctor said:

Hmm, how many reputations do I have?

 

I am slacking it seems.

Your stats  look normal to me ? Vs abby normal.

 

 

 

[rickca]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

I wonder if it's counting upvote/like/thanks given as well as received

I had the same thought.  Reputation should not count upvote/like/thanks given, only received.  I don't know what is counted currently.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I'm going to ditch the visible reputation system for now. Weighing the pros and cons, it just doesn't seem to have many pros. 

[wgscott]

Would it be possible at some point to restore the ability of a user to edit previous blog posts?  Mine are a mess now, with lots of broken image links and other problems.

[Jud]

38 minutes ago, mansr said:

Jealous much?

 

A fair (though I would think incorrect) comment, but seeing an upvote for it to me illustrates what I think is the primary problem with the system as a way to assess which comments have value.

 

At least for me, the valuable comments are those that provide information I didn’t know.  So we ought to see bunches of upvotes in the Q&A section, fewer in threads where more heated arguments take place.  Yet of course it tends to be just the opposite.

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, Jud said:

At least for me, the valuable comments are those that provide information I didn’t know.

I'll often upvote a comment if I think it presents accurate information in a well articulated manner. This makes it potentially useful, even if I didn't personally learn anything new from it.

[rickca]

4 minutes ago, Jud said:

At least for me, the valuable comments are those that provide information I didn’t know.  So we ought to see bunches of upvotes in the Q&A section, fewer in threads where more heated arguments take place.  Yet of course it tends to be just the opposite.

It doesn't take much heated argument for me to hit the 'ignore this topic'  button.  Life is too short for reality show drama.

[The Computer Audiophile]

18 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Would it be possible at some point to restore the ability of a user to edit previous blog posts?  Mine are a mess now, with lots of broken image links and other problems.

Yes, we've done this for Mitchco and will do it for you. Stand by...

[The Computer Audiophile]

Try editing your blogs now @wgscott

[wgscott]

Thanks. The editing works now, but I think the images are long gone.

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, wgscott said:

Although I agree with your conclusion, I think you are very wrong about Mans.  He is one of the most genuinely knowledgeable and helpful people here.

 

Knowledgeable no doubt.  But with that knowledge comes responsibility to yield it in a helpful manner.  Insulting or condescending snark does not usually quality as such--though those are often the posts that a certain group click the up-arrow on.

That said, I have up-voted plenty of his posts myself.  Technically clarity is always a good thing!

[Despite often being the brunt of his posts (and I recall him saying some truly uncalled for things towards JS), I harbor little ill-will towards him.  I know that not everyone on the internet possesses strong social skills...  ]

 

Sorry guys.  Back to CA forum function feedback.  

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, Superdad said:

 

As evidenced by our resident self-proclaimed "troll" showing with a shocking 5,763 reputation points.  

 

Yeah, that just highlighted the futility of the score.

 

49 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'm going to ditch the visible reputation system for now. Weighing the pros and cons, it just doesn't seem to have many pros. 

 

A real pity.

 

I wish there were a way to highlight those who provide value and service (as oppose to snark and condescension) to the community, and who have earned the right to be called helpful, credible and trustworthy.

 

For a while there, I wondered if you could derive a better metric by dividing the reputation score by total post count. But that still doesn't help.

 

The only other weapon against snark and trolling is a "downvote" button, but that would probably provoke open warfare.

 

I assert that it is within Chris' purview, as site owner, to award reputation scores at his own discretion. I'd trust that more than a vote-based system that will be abused.

 

 

[Ralf11]

Mans provides value and service as well as snark and condescension or at minimum acerbic commentary.  It is without question that he provides value and service.

 

Listening impressions alone can be useful, but only as long as one never forgets the power of expectation bias; otherwise, they are neither helpful nor credible, and there is no rational way around that fact.

 

Mans is one of the people that makes this site different and superior to the any other audio sites on the internet.

 

Finally - and I am sure you realize this Rajiv - anyone who bases their sense of self worth on a hobbyist site reputation score should be doing something real.

[austinpop]

43 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Finally - and I am sure you realize this Rajiv - anyone who bases their sense of self worth on a hobbyist site reputation score should be doing something real.

 

In case it came across that way, I was not looking for a way for my own personal score to be highlighted or recognized - yes, that would be sad indeed!

 

I was just wondering if a meaningful metric existed that might guide a newbie or occasional visitor.

 

As things stand, I agree with Chris, it's best to just suppress any such score. It doesn't take long for readers, even newbies, to get a measure of people. And after that, "Ignore Users" is a valuable tool!

[Ralf11]

it didn't come across that way at all - just a general observation

 

re: newbies - at least the guy telling them to spend a lot of $$ has absented himself

 

- I agree it would be helpful to do something for people new to computer audio - maybe a Dummies Guide?

 

but that is a diverse category - one guy has some Linn gear (active today) & another wanted to resolve an Apple CarPlay issue on his car

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

I was just wondering if a meaningful metric existed that might guide a newbie or occasional visitor.

 

Yes, I think that is what we all were hoping for.

 

23 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

re: newbies - at least the guy telling them to spend a lot of $$ has absented himself.

 

Trying to remember who you might be speaking of.  Recent or years past? 

 

23 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

I agree it would be helpful to do something for people new to computer audio - maybe a Dummies Guide?

 

Would be great, but a lot of work.  And aspects of it might stir controversy--as usual. 

 

23 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

but that is a diverse category - one guy has some Linn gear (active today) & another wanted to resolve an Apple CarPlay issue on his car

 

Indeed, there are many who "drive by" CA looking for answers to one or a few questions.  And then there are those of us who take up residence until we stink like old fish. 

[austinpop]

4 hours ago, Jud said:

I wonder if raising the number of favorable reactions required to “go green” would at least present readers with fewer such comments to look at.

 

I really like this idea. I believe the current threshold to go green is 2?

 

Perhaps raise this to 4 or 5?

[Hugo9000]

I tend to lurk on the internet more than I actually post, whether that is on a forum such as this one, or on something like facebook.  Despite my usual "silence," there are times I'd like to give some form of feedback to others.  Here's how I use the system on CA:

 

Thanks:  If I use this, it's typically because I want the poster to know that I'm thanking them for giving voice to something that is important to me, that I'm either too inarticulate or perhaps shy or embarrassed to comment directly on, etc.

 

Upvote:  Quite often, I'll use this if I agree with the post, but I will also use this if it's a post that I feel adds to the discussion, either in an area where there isn't settled science or consensus, or if it represents a common viewpoint that should be heard, etc.

 

Like:  If I use this, it's usually exactly what it says, I like it, whether it's music that someone shares, or whatever.  It is often something that is purely subjective, entertaining, amusing, etc.  If you make a positive comment about Leontyne Price, for example, I'll like the post or thank you.  If it's music that I like, but a performer I'm indifferent to, I'll upvote your post!  lol  If it's something I hate, I'll try to let it go and move on without comment or reaction

 

Off Topic:  I know I used this once to comment on my own post which was OT to the thread.  I don't think I've used it to comment on anyone else's posts.  If I disagree with a post, I'll either comment directly or just move on.  There are normally tons of OT posts on every internet forum I've joined through the years, and generally I don't let it bother me enough to comment about them being off topic.  I really hate the idea of being a hypocrite in anything, and I like to reserve the right to post something off topic myself without worrying about pot/kettle syndrome! haha  Besides, an admin will usually step in and lock a thread or remove posts if the situation really gets out of hand.

 

So, I don't see anyone reading a thread considering my upvotes or thanks as revealing the quality or lack of quality of someone's post, rather, to me it's simply a little feedback from me to the actual poster that what he or she says matters in some way.  Some of us don't have a voice/don't use our voices/don't feel anyone cares enough, so having a little way of giving thanks to others is appreciated by us.  I hope that makes sense!

 

 

 

 

[mansr]

7 minutes ago, Superdad said:

Trying to remember who you might be speaking of.

The "neurotypical."

[davide256]

2 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

Yeah, that just highlighted the futility of the score.

 

 

A real pity.

 

I wish there were a way to highlight those who provide value and service (as oppose to snark and condescension) to the community, and who have earned the right to be called helpful, credible and trustworthy.

 

For a while there, I wondered if you could derive a better metric by dividing the reputation score by total post count. But that still doesn't help.

 

The only other weapon against snark and trolling is a "downvote" button, but that would probably provoke open warfare.

 

I assert that it is within Chris' purview, as site owner, to award reputation scores at his own discretion. I'd trust that more than a vote-based system that will be abused.

 

 

I'd rather see a " I tried what the author recommended and it worked for me" button.   A lot of folks use the up vote button not for contributions that improve their practice of the hobby but because the post tickles their sense of humor.. for them it would be better to have a "thats funny" vote button

[The Computer Audiophile]

We can have as many buttons as we want and score them as we want etc...

 

At some point it gets a bit overwhelming.

 

I'm always open to suggestions.

[rickca]

How about a different set of buttons.

 

Helpful - resolved a problem, helped me make a decision, gave me a good idea

Agree - concur with your opinion/recommendation

Pointless - waste of time or off topic

 

Maybe we also need a Funny button to separate out those reactions.

 

It would be really interesting to periodically see which users get the most reactions in each category.  I'm pretty sure the Pointless category would match my list of ignored users.