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 
visibility/urgency.

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).

-Charles
Received on Friday, 6 January 2012 17:41:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:48 GMT