[Mailman-Developers] [HyperKitty] Rating of posts

[Aamir Khan]

ok. I think we both are talking about the same thing. And, I totally agree
with your point that there should also be a user level rating as well, but
the question is how do we rate users,

one way is to calculate using number of upvotes and downvotes on his/her
answers.

Any other suggestion?

I think ultimately HyperKitty should have both user level and email level
rating but I think email level rating is more basic and I think it's better
to implement it first.


On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl at libertytrek.org> wrote:

> Hi Aamir,
>
> I think you misunderstood what I was saying... see below...
>
> On 2012-06-07 1:14 PM, Aamir Khan <syst3m.w0rm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>
>>> I would also like to see a way for each user to be able to rate
>>> other *users*, not just their individual posts...
>>>
>>> An example with this list: I would rate Mark Sapiro as '5' (or
>>> whatever was designated as 'highest value'), so whenever I sort
>>> answers to any particular questions, Marks answers should appear at
>>> the top of the results before anyone else's (even if someone else's
>>> post had a higher rating than Marks for a particular thread) - then
>>> would come the individual posts from other users (who I hadn't yet
>>> rated)...
>>>
>>> Hope that made sense...
>>>
>>
>  I don't completely agree with your point. Let's say Mark posts good
>> emails to the list then he will obviously get a higher rating by users.
>>
>
> My understanding was the initial plan was only to allow for rating
> individual *posts*, not the *posters* - so, in your example, Mark *himself*
> will not have a rating (unless you provided a way to basically summarize an
> average of all of the ratings of all of each users posts)...
>
> What I was talking about, is a way for me to rate Mark for my own
> *personal* benefit...
>
>
>  The primary purpose of archiver is to serve people who are not
>> subscribed to the mailing list.
>>
>
> I disagree...
>
> The primary purpose of the archiver is to archive the list messages. Some
> lists *and list archives) are public, some are not.
>
>
>  They don't even know who Mark is
>>
>
> They do if they are a member of the list for any amount of time.
>
>
>  and if they encounter a particular question lets say "How to setup
>> Mailman3 in virtualenv" then they would like to see the best answer
>> and not the answer of person who generally posts good answer to the
>> list.
>>
>
> Again, I think you misunderstood... and again - I was talking about a way
> for me to rate Mark, which would be stored as one of *my* preferences...
> so, only *I* would benefit from rating him highly - no one else would know
> that I had rated him highly.
>
> Think of it as a way for me to filter answers to questions based on who
> *I* trust and am interested in hearing from.
>
> I'd also like a way to rate users negatively, so I won't even see their
> posts... again, said ratings only having any meaning for me when I'm logged
> in.
>
>  Do you agree?
>>
>
> I don't think we are talking about the same thing, so until we both agree
> on what we are discussing, I don't think the question is relevant... ;)
>



-- 
Aamir Khan | 3rd Year  | Computer Science & Engineering | IIT Roorkee