Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #690
    AvatarRezwan
    Member

    Hi Folks,

    About that ranking feature, I don’t see how it can work in the forums. It will only be used in the weblogs for now. But before I install it, let’s have a discussion about phrasing. We can

    Setting up Flags

    By default, Diggie is already set up with 3 flags: “Up” (+1), “Neutral” (0), and “Down” (-1). To add, modify or remove and Flags… To create a new flag, click the “Create a New Flag” button at the top right corner of the page. Let’s create a new Flag:

    1. In the “Flag Name” field, type in “boring“. This will be the short name used to call this flag later on. Remember, lowercase, no special characters and no spaces
    2. In the “Flag Label” field, type in “Boring“. This is the full name of the flag that will be displayed on your site later on
    3. In the “Flag Message” field, type in “Thanks for voting! You voted this item “Boring” (-3)“. This is the message that will be displayed to your users when they vote this flag for any entry
    4. In the “Flag Value” field, type in “-3“. This is the value of the flag that will be applied to the overall score of your entries when voted
    5. Click the “Update” button and the flag will be saved

    So…what do we name our flags? Just the standard “up, neutral, down”? One star through five stars? “peer reviewed” through “pseudoscience”?

    #5384
    AvatarRezwan
    Member

    As for using ranking in contests – I suppose we could set up a unique “weblog” for each contest, and a SAEF (stand alone entry form) for this weblog so that people could submit entries – multiple entries even. Then we could add the ranking feature there. We could try this with the logo. OK. this is doable. OK…first a few other things with the main site structure.

    #5967
    Avatarvansig
    Member

    Rezwan wrote:
    So…what do we name our flags? Just the standard “up, neutral, down”? One star through five stars? “peer reviewed” through “pseudoscience”?

    someone complained that ranking becomes a matter of how much you agree with something rather than something about quality. perhaps by naming these rankings about quality, that wont be a problem? eg: drivel, off-topic, dubious, relevant, insightful, accurate

    #5975
    AvatarPhil’s Dad
    Member

    Someone? SOMEONE? DO I LOOK LIKE A SOM… never mind.
    Definately dubious. >:(

    #5976
    AvatarBrian H
    Member

    Phil’s Dad wrote: Someone? SOMEONE? DO I LOOK LIKE A SOM… never mind.
    Definately dubious. >:(

    Questionable definite, though. No “a”, eh? :cheese: :coolgrin: :snake:

    #6002
    AvatarPhil’s Dad
    Member

    :red:

    #6006
    AvatarBrian H
    Member

    vansig wrote:

    So…what do we name our flags? Just the standard “up, neutral, down”? One star through five stars? “peer reviewed” through “pseudoscience”?

    someone complained that ranking becomes a matter of how much you agree with something rather than something about quality. perhaps by naming these rankings about quality, that wont be a problem? eg: drivel, off-topic, dubious, relevant, insightful, accurate
    The more I think about it, the less appealing it seems. It’s almost like a continuous flame-war between posters.

    #6007
    BreakableBreakable
    Keymaster

    Maybe instead we could nominate posts/threads every year/month/(week?) for something?
    Best/Funniest/Insightful/Informative Forum/Section Thread/Post/Poster of the year/month/week? in case someone feels like it…
    Edit:I don’t think we need any technology for that, just an agreement/announcement.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.