Slenderblog vs. Slanderblog

Well still, the 0 vote does nothing. I would just have three categories... plus, minus, and no vote yet. The purpose is to get blogs noticed. Just list everything alphabetically within those three categories and stop worrying so much about placing them numerically and alphabetically. That cuts out a lot of work right there.

I completely understand the up/downvote is probably too difficult to implement. Too bad though. It would make everything so much simpler in the long run.

The zero vote allows people to make comments on blogs, while not making a definite ruling. I would, for example, +0 Take the Myth; I think it's neat, b but it's no great shakes.

The problem with the system you suggest is that this is not an autocratic design; it is entirely based on user input. If we have only three categories (plus/no vote/minus), the project becomes useless with no real rankings. I note that InheritTheEarth downvoted Take the Myth earlier; does this mean that he puts it on the same level as H(a)unted and The Abducted? Of course not. The numerical rankings are the most important, because they form the true ranking system; alphabetical order is only for the sake of reader convenience.

I'm not saying discard the vote. Still list the vote. Just don't list the blog by the vote. That makes it easier to find a blog if you know the first letter of the title. You can still go down the list and see the vote behind it. And whoever edited the list would only have to change the number of votes whenever it was updated, rather than moving things up, down, and around as much. A time saver and a stress reducer all in one.

Anyway, that's just my opinion and since I wouldn't be editing the list, it's a completely arbitrary opinion at that. Just throwing my 2 cents at you. Make of it what you will.

Er.... just tossing my two cents in, but... Would you like me to do this new list? I already follow all of the Slenderverse media and new blogs are suggested to me from time to time. I'm in the prosess of re categorizing them anyway and I'm good with basic coding (links, strike throughs, bold, etc) so it wouldn't be too much more that I'd be doing.

Just that this is Board coding and not HTML, it's still very similar and I'd be willing to update it once a week :3

EDIT: also, I like the idea of having them all alphabetized and starting off on a clean slate :3

b...but I'm close to catching Strahm! XD

Do either of you two have Skype? If so, it might be best to add me, so we can work something out from there. I've had one or two people say they're willing to help with updating the list, so the main thing we have to work out now is what the new system will be, if we're using a new system.

Changing the formatting of the rating to a simple alphabetised list would make it easier to find any particular blog, but it also makes it hard to see, at a glance, the quality of a blog from the list, which the current system at least allows.

One idea I've seen punted around frequently is a ten-point scale; you number each blog as an integer from one-to-ten, then average out the result, which goes on the list.

Let me just point something out: the reason I went with a three-point scale is because it doesn't leave much in the way for hedging. It can be described as "good-meh-bad." The reason I used the three-point scale in the first place is because a ten-point scale is incredibly arbitrary. What's the difference between a six and a seven? A seven and an eight? You end up with all the votes being either the upper end of the scale (8, 9, 10), 5, and 1. It's far too arbitrary. If you MUST change from a three-point scale, though, make sure that it's no more than a five-point one. I'd suggest make the middle point a 0 with two points on either side.

Then again, I'm not involved in this anymore. But I can at least voice my opinions, and I think that a ten-point scale would be a disaster.

I agree that a 10 point scale is too subjective. 3 point is nice, easy, doesn't allow for arbitrary number pickings.

The three-point scale has only two numbers which affect the standings; one and minus one.

The ten-point scale does have it's issues, yes; you'd need concentrated effort to make people use two, three and four. But the current system is concentrated positively, too; compare the numbers of Slenderfame blogs to Slendershame ones. Slenderfame is also a very large category; until recently, Take the Myth was in there at fifteen, side-by-side with Seeking Truth at quite a few over thirty.

Organising the list alphabetically, using a ten-point scale (which averages out) and formatting each entry like this:

[Blog Name] [Rank]/[Max Rank] ([Number of Voters])

This shows a work's popularity, and the consensus on how highly it should be ranked.

The three-point scale forces extremes.

I think a 5-point scale is a good idea. A bit more specific than 3, and less arbitrary then 10. I'd be too indecisive to use it, but I still feel it's a better system.

The 5-point scale also have the advantage of [Really Bad] [Bad] [Okay/No vote] [Good] [Really Good], which is pretty much what we use already.

-sniff- Now people will never know that I'm actually Slenderblog and not Slenderage. =(



Also, yes, I have been wishing for a 5-point scale. Might need to edit the guidelines though. Call it... 20 and above for Slenderfame? And Slenderblog would start at 10, I guess.

With a 5-point scale, it might be better to average scores. Unless it would be -2 to 2. Then I guess you could just double the bracket widths.

Hey, I only lost +1 in this reset, so I'm not too torn up.

And I'd say 5-point.

I think that if we go by a point scale instead of averaging them, we'd maybe have to increase things just a little bit, just considering that we've got a lot of people voting now. Maybe take it by 1.5 if we do a 5-point scale, so 15 for Slenderblog instead of 10.

What if the points were averaged into stars? Then no one would have to know exactly how many points something had, merely its rating and perhaps how many voters had voted.

Just adding another agreement for a 5 point system. It would allow those voting to be more accurate and subjective with their voting then a then a three point system would allow. I might also give a clearer picture then a three point system. The system used here was in most cases supported by the small review-ish comments on the blogs, often describing why they voted the way they did. The problem is in choosing which system to use , whether it's a 1-5 scale or a -2/0/+2 scale.




But, then I've just reiterated what everybody's saying. I'm fine with whatever system, as long as it's easy to understand for those who are voting.

what about +1 old system is +1 in new system, but +1 with commentary about why its good is +2?

and vice versa

@Zero: But there are people like me who have a bit of a hard time putting what I like/hat about a blog so I don't put anything >///>;

I still think that either the 5 point of the 10 point system would work.

well you're active so you can revote on stuff. *shrug* it was a mostly silly idea anyway

New URL for Have You Seen Me? : http://keeplookingforthelost.wordpress.com