[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
[phoenix-epic-dev] Fwd: Re: Send EPIC rating ideas!
|
Some good ideas about EPIC rating from Eric Clayberg...
EPIC rating ideas:
1) Currently, plug-ins don't appear on the Top Rated list until they
have 10 votes. That is too few votes and makes them easily
susceptible to attack votes. I would suggest changing the
requirement to a minimum of 50 votes (or maybe 1-2% of the plug-in
with the highest number of votes...currently ~4000). That would have
two benefits: 1) plug-ins would need to show a reasonable amount of
popular support before appearing (10 votes is far too few); 2) once
the plug-ins do make the list, they will have enough votes to
survive a couple of "1" votes.
2) Disallow a single IP address from rating more than one (or two?)
plug-ins with a "1" (or maybe less than "3"). There is no *valid*
reason for a single IP address to slam multiple plug-ins with low
votes. Alternatively, maybe disallow more than one "1" vote per IP
address in a 24 hour period. Can we purge the database of IP
addresses that made multiple low votes in a short amount of time? :-)
3) Currently, EPiC shows the top 10 plug-ins. How about showing the
top 20 instead? That would reduce the pressure on lower ranked
plug-ins to cheat.
4) Anonymous voting should be preserved as-is...at least for
*external* votes. For anonymous votes internal to EPiC, either
eliminate them or impose restrictions like no more than one vote in
a 24 hour period per IP address. The voter would be told to register
in order to make additional votes. This would make it much harder
for someone to go to EPiC and throw multiple low votes at various
plug-ins in a short amount of time (one per minute based on the
current rules).
5) How about weighted voting? A single registered vote would count
as 5-10 anonymous votes. An anonymous voter would be told to
register to have their vote count more.
6) How about the ability to respond to rater's comments? It has
always annoyed me that I have no way to refute any bogus comments
made about one of my plug-ins. The 2Y site suffers from this same
problem.
7) How about requiring that all votes made on the EPiC site include
a brief comment? That would force a rater to at least provide some
justification for their vote. I think the 2Y site does this. I would
not require this for external votes.
-Eric
--
----------------------------------------
Mike Taylor
President and CEO
Instantiations, Inc.
Power Tools for Professional Software Developers
Voice: (503) 598-4911
mike_taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.instantiations.com
