Recs, come and get your recs, fresh in this morning..

[stooz]

Little thumb top right on a post
best of" now called Best posts and Best users" - under Quick links menu..



Its just the raw bones and more improvements to make to it. But hopefully it does most of the requirements

[Itsallaguess]

Little thumb top right on a post
"best of" now called "Posts toplist" and "thanks toplist" - under Quick links menu..

It's just the raw bones and more improvements to make to it. But hopefully it does most of the requirements

Great stuff.

Just one little thing Stooz, is there a chance you can swap the two new lists around under the 'Quick Links' list, so that the 'Posts Toplist' is the bottom option?

I imagine that one will be the one most people will want to go to most often, and having it slap bottom of the list will help with that, rather than having to remember it's the next to bottom one, especially given the slight ambiguity in the current naming of the two lists.

Not sure of anyone else's thoughts on this?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[AleisterCrowley]

I see the thumb changes to an Unthank button after use - http://www.the-unthanks.com/about/who-are-the-unthanks/

[stooz]

Now shows the names of the thanks and the count... Mmm maybe not?

[mc2fool]

Now shows the names of the thanks and the count... Mmm maybe not?

Definitely not. At least not unless users have the ability to turn it off, as they did on TMF.

BTW: what is the "rating" exactly?

[AleisterCrowley]

Yes, lose the notifications/names and just keep the rec count

[robbelg]

BTW: what is the "rating" exactly?

I'm guessing its ratio of recs to views

[stooz]

I like the count, but not the names... I might tweak that for the former only.
The rating is a maths rating of total recs vs number of replies on the whole topic
rating = round up (number of recs for this post / total recs for topic / 100)

[kiloran]

Yes, lose the notifications/names and just keep the rec count

Keep the names. I need to know who to take off my christmas card list.

--kiloran

[stooz]

count only now...

did I mention this is a work in progress? Or should I say this site listens to its users and is constantly working on creating a better environme...I cant keep that up

[kiloran]

Little thumb top right on a post
best of" now called Best posts and Best users" - under Quick links menu..



Its just the raw bones and more improvements to make to it. But hopefully it does most of the requirements

Stooz, what is the period for the Best Posts? Rolling 24 hour, current week, or ....???

--kiloran

[stooz]

At the moment - life.
Thats one the improvements planned - an option to show past 30 days/ week etc.

[Gaggsy]

Well done Stooz.
Your work is appreciated

[kiloran]

At the moment - life.
Thats one the improvements planned - an option to show past 30 days/ week etc.

That's a pity (and I feel really bad about appearing to criticise )

Don't overdo the work on the planned improvement, we're patient. Tomorrow will be fine

--kiloran

[mc2fool]

The rating is a maths rating of total recs vs number of replies on the whole topic
rating = round up (number of recs for this post / total recs for topic / 100)

Uh?

Firstly, which of the above is correct, replies or recs for the topic?

Secondly (and in either case), really? So as the replies/recs for other posts in the topic increases, the rating for a particular post will decrease?

[Gengulphus]

count only now...

I notice that in the "Has thanked: <N> times" item in the poster's description to the right of each post in a post listing, the "<N> times" parts is a link, and clicking on it produces all the posts the user has recced. That means that reccing is not anonymous - it will be a bit tedious to collect "who recced what?" data, but it can be done. (And I also see a potential server load nightmare there if people come up with scripts to make it less tedious...)

I also see that there are notification options to be notified when someone recs or unrecs a post of yours. This again means that reccing and unreccing are not anonymous, and I can see the latter in particular potentially causing trouble - I really don't want to see "why did you unrec my post?" posts! I'm rather amazed that there are notification options for routine events such as posting to a bookmarked/subscribed topic and (un)reccing anyway - it must create immense numbers of notifications, and I at least have turned them all off to avoid being flooded with notifications. But given that they do exist, I think users should have the option to make their (un)reccing anonymous - which could be done either by preventing it producing notifications at all, or by making the notifications it does produce contain "An anonymous Lemon" or suchlike in place of the (un)reccer's name.

Gengulphus

[gryffron]

Fantastic.

Just one observation. What has laughing lemons done to be shunned by this improvement? Afaics it affects every other board, even lootp.

Gryff

[Itsallaguess]

I notice that in the "Has thanked: <N> times" item in the poster's description to the right of each post in a post listing, the "<N> times" parts is a link, and clicking on it produces all the posts the user has recced. That means that reccing is not anonymous - it will be a bit tedious to collect "who recced what?" data, but it can be done. (And I also see a potential server load nightmare there if people come up with scripts to make it less tedious...)

I also see that there are notification options to be notified when someone recs or unrecs a post of yours. This again means that reccing and unreccing are not anonymous, and I can see the latter in particular potentially causing trouble - I really don't want to see "why did you unrec my post?" posts! I'm rather amazed that there are notification options for routine events such as posting to a bookmarked/subscribed topic and (un)reccing anyway - it must create immense numbers of notifications, and I at least have turned them all off to avoid being flooded with notifications. But given that they do exist, I think users should have the option to make their (un)reccing anonymous - which could be done either by preventing it producing notifications at all, or by making the notifications it does produce contain "An anonymous Lemon" or suchlike in place of the (un)reccer's name.

Gengulphus

Totally agree with Gengulphus here, and I'd go further and ensure that there's full anonymity in all cases with regards to 'thanks' and 'un-thanks' decisions made by people.

I think leaving both open to visibility by external parties or the people themselves will lead to issues further down the line, so I think this should be considered as a priority to be honest, to ensure the full anonymity of both cases.

Just my view as well, of course, and put here as part of this discussion. Happy to be over-ruled if that's the way it's going to be, but I won't be using the functionality if there's no anonymity, and I imagine this will be the case for others too.

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[stooz]

Ok so the best posts is good but the list of who I rec is bad?

[saechunu]

Why should these 'recs' / thanks be anonymous?

The MSE forums use a 'thanks' systems, which lets you see who has thanked a poster's post, and that seems to work very well.

Why should it be anonymous here?