Forum:The "rating" feature

Forums: Index > Village Dump > The "rating" feature

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6144 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

is there a page where you can see ranks, viz. ranks of pages ordered by their "ratings" (by "ratings feature" i mean the one recently introduced -- the thing with two arrows beside it on top of every "article" page)? -- mowgli 16:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, here. —Braydie at 16:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks! i've brought down the votes on each page by a notch now. wanted to do this for sometime but didn't know where the top twenty or thirty were listed. well, i suppose i'll attack the rest of the overrated pages when they reach these top ten, for now. is there a page for the next ten btw? just curious.-- mowgli 18:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

i've left "readme.txt" undisturbed. why is spang, redirected to whore, shown as +18 when "whore" is actually 0? "in" joke, is it, you queers? or am i hallucinating again (oh noes)? -- mowgli 18:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

jimbo wales is right. straw polls serves no useful purpose -- they only serve to entrench people in hardened positions before a discussion can even, like, commence. "poof" has 12 votes even after my down voting it? my labrador woofs much better. but it's all good. very good and welcome. now we know that it's not just uncyclopedia that sucks but its readers suck too. -- mowgli 19:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I can answer the Spang question. He was showing a flaw in the voting system by posting a link to the upvote for his userpage. Userpages don't have voting, so it shows up as the mainspace page (which I redirected to whore in commemoration). According to Spang, he was showing a couple of the problems with the system at once. As to the other, well... people vote on things that others are voting on. It's a weird quirk of human nature. Over time, though, it WILL correct itself, as QDb did. We'll just have to put up with the weird quirks for now.--<<>> 00:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, what whould happen if an article is complete shite, gets a rating of -6 (or so) and then someone decides to rewrite it completely. It shall be stuck with the -7(or so)? --Atomic 18:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

People would probably vote it back up again pretty soon, I guess. Things don't tend to stay at the bottom/top if they don't belong there (see the uncyc QDB for an example) and that solves the problem of sockpuppet voting as well, in the long run. -- 18:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The rewriter could also ask an admin to delete and restore the page after the rewrite. That resets the score to zero. —rc (t) 01:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I get the idea of rating an article, but really what does it say by doing so. Is it rating funniness, satire, or what? Its almost like a toy for a monkey to play with. Does the monkey understand what it means? --HP talk 05:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

No, but it's fun. Got any bananas? -- 13:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)