vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread AK
I have absolutely no idea what e.g. 116/47 rating for a script on vim.org means, I bet 99.9% of new users to the site don't, either, and there's no explanation or a link to explanation anywhere near it. -ak -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your r

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread Taylor Hedberg
AK, Wed 2012-03-14 @ 12:32:44-0400: > I have absolutely no idea what e.g. 116/47 rating for a script on > vim.org means, I bet 99.9% of new users to the site don't, either, and > there's no explanation or a link to explanation anywhere near it. Yes there is [1]. Not saying it's easy to find or cou

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread AK
On 03/14/2012 12:35 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: AK, Wed 2012-03-14 @ 12:32:44-0400: I have absolutely no idea what e.g. 116/47 rating for a script on vim.org means, I bet 99.9% of new users to the site don't, either, and there's no explanation or a link to explanation anywhere near it. Yes there

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread Taylor Hedberg
AK, Wed 2012-03-14 @ 12:51:47-0400: > It does not appear in navigation sidebar for me, only on the 'site > help' page. You have to click on "Scripts" in the sidebar, and then "Karma" appears underneath it. > I think it'd be much better if it was linked from the script karma box > itself. Almost

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread AK
On 03/14/2012 12:55 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: AK, Wed 2012-03-14 @ 12:51:47-0400: It does not appear in navigation sidebar for me, only on the 'site help' page. You have to click on "Scripts" in the sidebar, and then "Karma" appears underneath it. Well, think of how a typical user might try

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread Taylor Hedberg
I agree with you that it's not easy or intuitive to locate the explanation. I'm not defending the way it is currently designed. Just stating the facts. I don't think the rating system itself is bad, just a bit unusual. If it were easier to locate the explanation, I don't think there would be much

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread AK
On 03/14/2012 01:37 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: I agree with you that it's not easy or intuitive to locate the explanation. I'm not defending the way it is currently designed. Just stating the facts. I don't think the rating system itself is bad, just a bit unusual. If it were easier to locate the

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread Benjamin R. Haskell
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, AK wrote: On 03/14/2012 12:55 PM, Taylor Hedberg wrote: AK, Wed 2012-03-14 @ 12:51:47-0400: It does not appear in navigation sidebar for me, only on the 'site help' page. You have to click on "Scripts" in the sidebar, and then "Karma" appears underneath it. [...] In

Re: vim.org ratings

2012-03-14 Thread Marc Weber
up voting = +4 down voting = -1 neutral = 0 or such. I personally don't like the voting because - there have been issues (either intentional or accidental down voting within a couple of hours for some plugins) - they don't provide nice feedback to authors. - if you have bad votings for your init