> You might be interested to google "fundamental attribution error".
After a briefly read on Wikipedia, I'm glad you pointed that out. I'll read more. Any other comment I could make on that seems to open too many doors to discussions not related to Clojure, but thank you for sharing. As for the voting, I try not to get to close to specific details/ failures of hn/reddit style forums. All I need to know is that when I look at the top voted posts/comments vs. the bottom votes (on HN) I generally find they do a much better job separating the good from the bad than not doing it at all. On Dec 21, 6:39 pm, Ken Wesson <kwess...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:47 PM, Tim Robinson <tim.blacks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In my humble opinion, I don't think what you're experiencing will get > > any better, but here are a few thoughts: > > > 1. You can still enjoy the community by changing your expectations and > > adopting 1 single rule (which I constantly try to remind myself with > > all the time): > > > See people in a positive light, abrasive comment or otherwise. You're > > more likely to treat people with respect when you see them as > > genuinely good people than if you let adhoc comments dictate your > > feelings for that person. > > You might be interested to google "fundamental attribution error". > > > 2. With intentional over the top flare, adding to a fire..... Why on > > Gods earth are we using Google groups as a community forum? It's > > kinda, really, truly, sucky. > > Lol :) > > > I mean really - voting based forums like hackernews/reddit have been > > around for years. > > The single most useful tool that moderators/community leaders have at > > their disposal is to place value based incentives which will get large > > masses following a set of expectations. > > > Note: I know Google groups has voting, but frankly the implementation > > bites (Lol).... it does not elevate the good and drown the bad which > > would allow us to read the valuable and ignore the crap. > > I don't even register votes happen in google groups. > > Not only that, but the votes are only visible in the sucky Google > Groups interface. I expect most of us go there only to subscribe and > then subsequently set various account options; we do our reading and > replying in our email clients. Even gmail's web interface provides a > superior user experience to Google Groups (including having a handy > draft autosave feature), though it also doesn't show Groups ratings > for Groups emails. > > But yes, there are problems with the Groups votes besides that. It's > exposed only as a one-to-five-star rating plus the sample size, rather > than being a digg or reddit style positive or negative number; there's > no filtering option based on it; and it's apparently fairly easy to > game. I've seen Groups showing Usenet posts with larger numbers of > votes (good or bad) than there are active participants in the > newsgroup, for instance. Likely you can vote, disconnect and reconnect > to the net with a different IP, and then vote again, up to 256 times > if you have a typical ISP. (You'd actually hit diminishing returns > around halfway there when more often than not you'd log in with an IP > that had already voted and have to try again. But I can see someone > with patience and a will to pervert the vote manage to get forty, or > fifty, or even sixty votes out of it before deciding it would suffice. > :)) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
