RCS - Steamlike Voting System
What proposed
Implement voting system like in Steam, when user have to comment somehow while rating game. It work well in Steam many years and if game have too high/low rate you can always go to comment section and read what people say about it.
We don't need things like visibility or comment language , but IMO would be nice to limit minimum comment lenght to some +/- 20 characters. Also no need exactly to write new comment to vote, if user already reply to someone else comment (already take part in discussing) - user can vote now.
Why proposed
- At least we will know what's on people mind. Why someone like/dislike what proposed. Good words will make author feel happy. Criticism may help author to guess what proposed wrong. Then it help in healthy discussing things.
- Such system may cause less votes, because some people for some reasons may not want to be public or write anything. But then each vote value will grow up, each vote will be argued by some comment. We all benefit from this.
- Last sad thing - today for me it look like some people abuse twinks to "rule" this place. I really want to be wrong in such asumptions... but it looks like this. Not say that such vote system 100% save RCS from such activity, but can make it a bit harder. After all such dishonest abusers don't like to be public (IMO).
We can test it right here - leave you comment below if you wote it + or - .
As always - thanks for reading. Also you can check my other suggestions .
16 Comments
It also refrains a little more the vote spam issue. People are lazy, some won't bother if they have to write stuff to cast a vote.
Vote ++
* @-L0Lock- * then each vote value will grow up, each vote will be argued
* @IIIFGIII * I think that is exactly what @-L0Lock- meant, in a positive way.
* @-L0Lock- * This might also cut down on some of these automated advertisements in the other way around, if they have to cast a vote to write stuff : {attachment Spampng}
* @zorro.weaver * Not sure about that, upvoting will increase the visibility of the post, and so of the ad.
if you do this you also need some way of filtering the comments based on relevancy. In your example, "it would be helpful" is at the top and adds nothing to the conversation that an upvote wouldn't already do, whereas the other comment at least gives the reader some context as to why it would be useful.
that's my biggest complaint with a system like this- requiring a comment sounds great on paper, and if people use it the way it's intended then it's fantastic. The reality is that we'll have a lot of comments that are basically 20 characters worth of garbage so they can press the "submit" button.
This is why steam basically has reviews for reviews (helpful/not helpful/reward), it weights the comments based on how much they are actually contributing to the conversation so useless comments like "Cool idea, have an upvote" sink to the bottom (or disappear entirely).
* @testure * That's a good point. The other thing I am concerned about is that the voting will no longer be anonymous. This means that if I am voting for a friend, or someone I know, my voting will be biased. I will know that they will know it was me who downvoted them.
* @testure * There is no 100% best "no alternative" systems. You will always get "garbage" comments. Same as "garbage" proposals or anything else. It is the nature of things in our humans world. Everything can't be always 100% godlike unbelivable amazing. To find briliants between garbage that is the goal.
Then why garbage - to just say few good words to author sometimes matter... I think. What the point to spend time, write something if " no one care"?
* @zorro.weaver * And so what .. you scared that someone know your real position? Yes you/me/anyone like/dislike something, we have reasons, we even write this reasons in comments. Others will read them so this reasons now matter, not just somehing deep inside one head. If this reasons not deserve to be public so maybe such reasons not deserve to be counted?
We already have public "hearts" on Bledner Artists or Devtalks, why not be public here?
* @IIIFGIII * Good point. One more thing. I think you should have to comment to change your vote too. That will help explain why you lost a vote, and give you a chance to explain more or change the proposal in the first place to get them back. Also, when I see a proposal, I sometimes don't vote until I have asked a question and understand it better. There should be a "vote neutral" option to allow one to comment but not vote, until they better understand what they are voting for.
This makes a lot of sense, why should someone vote if they can't explain why?
* @zorro.weaver * What about the universal human right to laziness? 😁
Most proposals don't necesarily need a comment and I'm afraid it will generate a lot of junk. I can think of alternatives as public/ transparent voting or a daily quota based on karma points.
* @Ge Ro * So I guess you gave -1? Or not? If not so here was 6 points and now 3 - some three users gave -1 without any arguments why, with no chance to discuss anything and find any compromise... This issue looks for me more issue than some "lot of junk comments".
Again why "junk", few good words to support author isn't junk. I didn't post suggestion here to get those worthless points which I have for now 4000+. Same as dozens of votes. Less votes with some good words may be much valuable.
* @IIIFGIII * It is a real issue but I don't completely agree with the compulsory coment solution, so I didn't vote. Steam system seems inadequate here because they are asking for a review in fact, for the readers that can't experience the content first hand until they buy and play. Here the proposals are self-contained and user support by voting is enough. Now that I spent more time on it seems reasonable that an argumentation be asked only for a down vote. The conversation can be more condensed this way.
* @Ge Ro * Ok. So you think RCS is scpecial.
How about - YOU CAN JUST AGREE with author as far as proposals "self explanatory", BUT IF YOU DISAGREE - please argue/explain it somehow (you can't click -1 if you not commented this topic somehow) then it can be discussed with author/community to find "golden mean".
This "silent assasins" who kill proposals without a word against it are real issue. Look at this dude ManBlender what so wrong with suggestion on screnshot to make it -1. Most of his suggestion has -1 -2 -more. Looks more like someone just don't like this user personally and conctsntly kill everything he write no matter what proposed.
I stay here from early 2018 I remember different RCS. Place for growing ideas today become place for "hyping" ideas and killing others.