Scott Hardie | March 31, 2004
Getting IMs from certain male authors informing me that certain female authors are "hot!" (I won't name names) has gotten me thinking about programming an old feature: A ratings system for every item on the site. Users could rate goos, TC discussions, FIN posts, and other items either on a 1-10 ranking scale or a good/bad binary scale, and see which items were the most liked and most disliked by the general user body. I probably would not let people rate users directly because that's just getting too personal, but everything else on the site would be fair game. This feature was supposed to be a major improvement in this new integrated version of the site, but I gave up on it in a rush to finish by my self-imposed September deadline, then forgot about it. Today, this would take me about a day and a half to program, so tell me, is it worth it?

Erik Bates | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Lori Lancaster | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | March 31, 2004
It might be harder than you think to guess who has a crush on whom... then again it might not. :-)

To answer your questions in order:

Might some people rate discussions as a way of rating the author who started them? Maybe, but it's a chance I'm willing to take. I would do what I could to discourage the practice.

Are the ratings confidential? I will be the only person who can look up precisely how you voted, and I doubt I'll do it very often because the database table storing the ratings will probably not be easy to peruse. Users will only be able to see the combined rating of each item.

Will there be rating of recents? I hadn't planned on it, but I could do that.

Also, I should mention that each user would get to enter only one rating per item... changing your rating later would erase the previous rating. This would require users to be logged in, which would prevent strangers to the site from entering ratings. That would keep the tally down, but boy would it help the authenticity of the results.

John E Gunter | March 31, 2004
"I doubt I'll do it very often because the database table storing the ratings will probably not be easy to peruse."

Ah, but you could code a page or two or three that would let you peruse the database table a lot easier. ;-)

It's fine with me though.

Anna Gregoline | March 31, 2004
I'm just curious as to why you want to implement - feedback for you about the site's contents?

Jackie Mason | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Jackie Mason | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Anna Gregoline | March 31, 2004
Personally, I think it's kind of weird that Scott even mentioned this.

Steve Dunn | March 31, 2004
Eh, I don't think the proposed reform adds valuable functionality to the site, and it has the potential for mischief. I say skip it.

I agree with Anna this whole discussion is odd. But then, it is a natural consequence of a forum in which everyone posts photos that we are going to evaluate each others' hotness (or notness).

To combine the themes and create the greatest possible social malfunction, Scott, why don't you set up a system where we can rate each others' hotness on a scale of 1-10 and all users can see how hot all other users think they are?

Before you do that, though, I need to get a new picture. My current photo does not adequately convey my blazing hotness.

Melissa Erin | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Anna Gregoline | March 31, 2004
Amen to that.

Erik Bates | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

John E Gunter | March 31, 2004
Blurry, I just thought it was from the shining light coming off everyone's hotness! ;-)

Scott Hardie | March 31, 2004
LOL to everybody.... This is great...

Anna: Well, I wouldn't mind the negative ratings for some goos, some FIN posts, etc. if others got rated positively. Back in the karma days of TC1, some robot was surfing the site and racking up the negative karma for every entry. That got on my nerves. By limiting the ratings here to registered users only and giving each person one rating per item only, I think we would get a fair mix. (I do foresee a lot of people rating things only 10 or 1, not using the eight numbers in-between, but I could live with that I think.)

Jackie: Yes, there was karma on the original TC, as it was run by Greymatter. I liked the idea of karma, but I didn't like its vulnerabilities as I just explained, but I think I could get around that here. Hey, if it goes badly, I could simply remove ratings from the site in a fraction of the time it took me to add them.

Would this ratings concept be more appealing if I had not introduced it with a nod to AIHON and gotten you all thinking about how you look? I say again, the ratings would not apply to the users themselves.

I did not name which female users were considered "hot" around here so that each one could imagine that she is one of them -- but instead it seems like you are assuming you are not one of them. I should not have brought it up.

Anna Gregoline | March 31, 2004
It's just uncomfortable-feeling to think that people would be talking about other people here in that manner. I don't care if it happens, I guess I just don't want to hear about it.

I'm not thrilled about the rating idea, but it's your call.

Denise Sawicki | March 31, 2004
I don't know, I guess it doesn't make much sense to me to have ratings for the TC discussions. If someone has something to say about a discussion they can say it...

Lori Lancaster | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Kris Weberg | March 31, 2004
Heck, I didn't even submit the photo of me that's being used. I own no photos of myself, excluding legal identification for the purposes of drinking.

Anna Gregoline | March 31, 2004
Thanks for hitting on the head the real reason everyone needs a driver's license, Kris. =)

Scott Hardie | March 31, 2004
I don't think the comments indicate that the man has a crush on the woman, obsesses about her, fantasizes about her, wants to get to know her offline... I think it just means, "hey, she's cute," and that's all. This isn't the Phringe here. :-)

Lori Lancaster | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Erik Bates | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

John E Gunter | March 31, 2004
Damn Erik and I thought I pushed the envelope here! ;-)

So which Dawn did you just see, 1978 or 2004?

Lori Lancaster | March 31, 2004
[hidden by request]

Kris Weberg | April 1, 2004
More to the point, why would anyone who thought a fellow poster was "hot" IM this informtation to anyone else, especially the site owner?

Steve West | April 1, 2004
I think that question mark looks reaalllly good. Mmmmmm, curvy.

Erik Bates | April 1, 2004
[hidden by request]

Jackie Mason | April 1, 2004
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | April 1, 2004
I rarely point out how attractive I may find a particular woman (ask certain friends who have tried to get it out of me), but apparently there's a sign hanging on my AIM name saying "Tell this man whenever you notice that a new user on his site is hot."

This discussion is definitely getting filed under things I wish I had never brought up. :-)

Anthony Lewis | April 4, 2004
Eh, I think it's unnecessary.

People rate their interest in a topic by their responses. Little to no response = no interest. And vice-versa.

As far as who's hot goes...just click the pic directly to the left. Now THAT dude is one sexy bitch!

Lori Lancaster | April 4, 2004
[hidden by request]

Kris Weberg | April 5, 2004
So when are the photo sessions for the 2005 Celebrity Goo Game Calendar? Dibs on October. :)

Scott Hardie | April 5, 2004
I still regret introducing such a hurtful subject, but tell me this discussion hasn't generated some of the funniest comments we've ever had. :-)

Melissa Erin | April 5, 2004
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | April 5, 2004
Long-time users will remember My Friends Nude, featuring Aaron Fischer, Denise Sawicki, Lori Lancaster, and Matthew Preston in the buff. (Photo-editing has come a long way since 1998.)

Lori Lancaster | April 5, 2004
[hidden by request]

Kris Weberg | April 5, 2004
Wow. Those guys must work out a lot.


Want to participate? Please create an account a new account or log in.


Other Discussions Started by Scott Hardie

Gefeliciteerd

It will be some time before he reads this, but here's wishing Matthew Preston congratulations on his wedding today on St. Go »

Four Words

Seen online: What four words would you say to your seventeen-year-old self? Go »

UFOs and Government Conspiracies

According to a recent poll, 72% of Americans believe that the government isn't telling everything it knows about UFO activity. Go »

Born to Lose

I have just joined a fantasy hockey league with friends. I know nothing more about hockey than the average non-fan on the street. Go »

Gibberish

A lot of fuss has been made twice over Serene Branson's spouting of nonsense at the Grammy presentation, first for how silly the video was and then for how sociopathic we're all becoming for having the sick sense of humor to laugh at a poor woman suffering a medical emergency. Go »

27 Views on War, and Counting

Slate asked 27 people in "politics, the arts, entertainment, business and other fields" what they thought of an American invasion of Iraq, now that we may finally be on the verge of one. Go »