Forum

  • If you are new to these Forums, please take a moment to register using the fields above.

Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ratings

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ratings

    Stars have recently appeared next to some of the threads in this forum, but there's no key to how the ratings have been compiled, why, or by whom. I can't make sense of them on a merit basis--the spam thread ("Freelancers") gets a star, while worthy threads lack any.

    On a related topic, I recently learned that Amazon.com includes ratings from other editions of a book, even if the text has been substantially revised. For example, the reader reviews of the 2nd edition of Morgenstern's "Organizing from the Inside Out" include reviews of the first edition, despite the fact that the second edition is over 70 pages longer. Amazon justifies this because "the titles are the same." Caveat emptor.

    Back to GTD, can someone please explain the stars?

  • #2
    Stars upon Thars (w/apologies to Dr. Seuss)

    Arduinna, I had the same question when I saw the stars this morning. If you mouse over the stars, it would appear that only one person has rated the thread. This is from the Forum FAQ:
    How do I rate a thread?
    You may find a small menu on thread pages which allows you to 'rate this thread' with a number between 1-5.

    Casting a vote for threads you view is entirely optional, but if you think that the thread is superb, you might rate it as a 5-star thread, or if you think that it's unspeakably dismal, you might choose to rate the thread with a single star.

    Once enough votes have been cast for the thread rating, you may see a set of stars appear with the title of the thread in the thread listings. These stars reflect the average vote cast, and can allow you to quickly see which threads are worth reading if you are on a very busy forum with a lot of threads.
    Even after reading the FAQ, I still wasn't able to figure out how to do a rating -- even if I wanted to do so. By the way, I guess the one star was for an "unspeakably dismal" thread if the rater followed the FAQ information.

    Carolyn

    Comment


    • #3
      re: ratings

      The "Rate Thread" menu box is at the top of the thread. Though it seems to me, it might be more logical to put it at the bottom of the page, as it's easier to form an opinion about a discussion after you've read it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Guilty ! But you could be too.

        I am apparently the first one to discover and use the user ratings. I have only rated a few items. The spammer got the lowest available rating. Because I had never seen stars on any threads I thought that maybe they were just to assist each user's own memory or to sort each individual user's view of the threads by the user's own rating.

        If you open a thread on the Davidco site forums, you can rate the thread by using the second button from the right.

        Comment


        • #5
          Actually, I do not find the ratings at all helpful or meaningful. They are rather distracting. What is helpful to some will have no value at all for others.

          Although I usually read discussions of software, I do plain vanilla. I use paper more than PDA. Clearly, I am in the minority.

          I check in at least once a day, and I read the new posts. Anything that is particularly helpful for my work-style is copied to a Word document and saved in my GTD folder.

          Thanks for the information on how to rate threads. I'm sure there are others who would like to do this.

          Carolyn

          P.S. I must have a different forum view. There is no "Rate Thread" box at the top of the thread, nor does the second button from the right have an option to rate a thread.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks, all, for the clarification. I don't have ratings ability, either.

            You may find a small menu on thread pages which allows you to 'rate this thread' with a number between 1-5.
            Perhaps the "may" allows for browser variations that preclude some from seeing the magic box.

            Comment


            • #7
              I wouldn't object to the removal or hiding of ratings

              My discovery was accidental. The last thing I expected was that my ratings would be the first and virtually the only ratings posted.

              I kind of like ratings such as Amazon's. You learn how to take them eventually.

              Sorry to have annoyed you.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Arduinna
                Thanks, all, for the clarification. I don't have ratings ability, either.

                Perhaps the "may" allows for browser variations that preclude some from seeing the magic box.
                I tried viewing the forums in both IE 6 and Firefox 1.0.2 and didn't see a rating option using either of them.
                Last edited by mscudder; 04-04-2005, 12:52 PM. Reason: typo

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ProfDD
                  My discovery was accidental. The last thing I expected was that my ratings would be the first and virtually the only ratings posted.

                  I kind of like ratings such as Amazon's. You learn how to take them eventually.

                  Sorry to have annoyed you.
                  Doctor DD! You sure haven't annoyed me! I enjoy your posts immensely, love how you mull things over and then some. I always come away with at least two more ways of looking at some issue that I might not have thought about at all. I just get annoyed by things that require interpretation--or can't be interpreted--and don't enrich in return for effort expended, which is how I experience those stars. About Amazon, I am now wiser, but I really felt duped when I realized what they were doing. Makes me cranky when I discover things like that.

                  I deliberated over adding to my prior post the wish that if they were going to have ratings here, there'd be some way to differentiate between "spam-level waste of time" and "sock drawer tips" on the low end, and "ultimate GTD implementation strategy" and "I laughed, I cried, it became a part of me" on the high end. Having deleted that attempt at levity, my post sounded pretty terse. Not meant.

                  Keep writing and rating, Doc.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Is it only available to "members" ?

                    I didn't see your moniker on the member list at www.davidco.com. It's free to become one as far as I know.

                    Alernatively, are you viewing threads from the site ?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ProfDD
                      I didn't see your moniker on the member list at www.davidco.com. It's free to become one as far as I know.

                      Alernatively, are you viewing threads from the site ?
                      Latter first, yes, I am viewing threads from davidco.com/forum/..., so that's not it. Hmmm.

                      About the member list, TesTeq made this observation in the sticky thread:
                      The Members List contains the recently registered members only.
                      TesTeq
                      TesTeq isn't on the list, either. I just tried re-registering, but no go. Possibly only those people who've registered recently have full privileges. Huh. Something to mull over while I'm doing labels.

                      Arduinna

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Ratings Mystery Solved!

                        This is Arduinna (freshly registered in reverse, as "Anni-Udra"). My new name appears in the member list, and ratings and attachments are enabled. But I'll stick with Arduinna, and hope they find out how to add us into the system so we all have the full set of forum features.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What I want to know is what it takes to be a "Senior Member"? I'm now a "senior," according to AARP (though I'm only 50). And, I'm a member (of the davidco forums, not AARP). So, doesn't that make me a "Senior Member"?

                          Randy Stokes

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            How do I get to be a senior member?

                            Originally posted by randystokes
                            What I want to know is what it takes to be a "Senior Member"? I'm now a "senior," according to AARP (though I'm only 50). And, I'm a member (of the davidco forums, not AARP). So, doesn't that make me a "Senior Member"?
                            Just a guess --

                            Although I had been reading the forum for months, I didn't become a member until December 2003, over a year after you joined. Thus, I suspect it has to do with number of posts. I have done 111 posts (this should be 112), and you haven't reached 100 yet. Maybe that's the magic number that makes one a senior member.

                            Carolyn

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              So, taking into account this post, as well as another one this morning, I should be within 19 of becoming a senior member! I need to get busy!

                              Randy

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X