W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Forums

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 09:40:35 -0800
Message-ID: <4F073213.2020809@jumis.com>
To: Jon Rimmer <jon.rimmer@gmail.com>
CC: Matthew Wilcox <mail@matthewwilcox.com>, David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>, www-style@w3.org
On 1/6/12 8:30 AM, Jon Rimmer wrote:
> On 6 January 2012 15:53, Matthew Wilcox<mail@matthewwilcox.com>  wrote:
>> >  I'm not entirely convinced of the merit of +1 for posts because simple
>> >  votes don't tell you what it is about the post has been up-voted. Was
>> >  it the idea, the witty retort, the explained implementation precisely,
>> >  part of the message, the whole of the message? I think it's much
>> >  better to actually talk.
> Well, it doesn't have to be as simple as up-votes and down-votes. It
> could be possible to supply context, in the same was as Slashdot lets
> you mark posts as insightful, funny, etc. You could have "+1 good
> idea", "+1 good explanation", etc.

I've been toying with the idea of adapting reddit's open source software.

The +1 and -1 options of the voting system can be used for 

In this manner, we would be able to +1 items that we find important, and 
then -1 them later when they are resolved, keeping active and unresolved 
threads a little more visible.

The format breaks down a bit of the length of mailing list replies; 
replies are generally going to be shorter, though there is room for 
subtopics of some length.

When and if I get a chance, I'll try an import of the mailing list 
archive into the system, to see how readable it is for prior posts 
(which would not have been formatted for the system).

Received on Friday, 6 January 2012 17:41:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:35:02 UTC