ghostrider
liberal exit   SSHOLEPosts: 2502 Registered: 7/29/2004 Offline
|
4/12/2007 at 16:53 |
^ I use the x option when applicable. You should too, so should everybody.
____________________
Things won't be the same for me. You will never know the difference. |
| |
vasudeva
Bad Taste in your Mouth  SSHOLEPosts: 4540 Registered: 3/8/2002 Offline
|
4/12/2007 at 17:51 |
Lownotes:If I recognize them, I'll hit them with a (-). But, I don't always know if something is old.
Ah -- but neither do I. Neither does the average visitor. That's why there's an Alpha Queue. I'm hoping that through artificial democratization of a portion of the content stream we can reach a consensus on the overall value of a link.
Without the Alpha Queue, 1 link in 5 or 10 would get pasted into IRC, with me asking
-Is this old? Have you seen it before?
-If so, is it good enough to make the rounds again?
-I dunno what I think about this. Do you care about it?
To a certain extent, you, Lownotes, are not just voting for you, Lownotes. You are (ideally) voting with the hordes in mind. If you know a link is old, but figure you only saw it because you obsessively read Japanese fruit news or something, then you can safely guess that it isn't old to a significant portion of the populace, and +1 it (assuming it's also somehow more interesting than Japanese fruit news sounds at first blush).
Also, I typically see the (X) option as throwing away my vote, because I doubt it's being used by enough people.
Hopefully, this idea is crazy wrong. When to delete should be crystal clear to everyone and probably occurs three or four times a week. I would expect that everyone, by now, has seen the When To Delete speechlet enough times that the X votes are sensible.
To my happy startlement, intermittent checks have revealed that this is mostly the case.
This was just deleted like two hours ago:
Kurt Vonnegut Ded
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=akNM_wEFNQPE&refer=muse
Author of Slughterhouse Five dies
This was a good and proper deletion. Why? Because it's still on the frontpage from this morning.
There should be some sort of option to label a submitted link as being old or a repeat, then that link's voting parameters change in some way. Perhaps links labeled as such get shipped to admins for deletion.
I dunno. Sometimes I wonder if the solution to the Alpha Queue Problem lies in some complex ruleset. For the time being, I still suspect not. People are more clever and thoughtful than software.
NB: I sound like a broken record and am filling in areas you may not be personally fuzzy on because history teaches us I can't reiterate basic Alpha Queue philosophy enough and am hoping to rise all boats. In fact, I've just realized that I need to start sending out a Guide to the Alpha Queue to everyone who becomes an Alpha. Hereby soliciting all drafts and additions to such a document which will become a thread and get emailed personally to all Alphas at Alphabirth and random intervals thereafter.
____________________
slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you. |
| |
Lownotes
They all float down here.  SSHOLEPosts: 186 Registered: 4/23/2005 Offline
|
4/12/2007 at 19:03 |
Edification complete. I'll start hitting X more often. |
| |
coknurmowth
Crisco Fux  SSHOLEPosts: 127 Registered: 10/20/2005 Offline
|
4/13/2007 at 17:36 |
What factors determine how long a link stays in the que?
Is it based on time? or a minimum number of total votes?
Also i remember you saying once that some links don't even go into the que...do some random links pass or fail automatically?
This is pretty interesting stuff, how long has it taken for LS to evolve into todays version?
____________________
|
| |
vasudeva
Bad Taste in your Mouth SSHOLEPosts: 4540 Registered: 3/8/2002 Offline
|
4/13/2007 at 18:20 |
coknurmowth: What factors determine how long a link stays in the que? Is it based on time? or a minimum number of total votes?
Number of votes only.
vasudeva:You can think of the +1, -1, and X as being a race. Whichever one gets satisfied first wins.
Technically it's possible for a link to move through the AQ in a matter of seconds, or to stay in there for eternity if it never gets enough votes to go anywhere. The longest I've seen a link to sit in the AQ is a couple days. Maybe a little longer for ones that escape the voting frame, which continues to confuse people.
Also i remember you saying once that some links don't even go into the que...do some random links pass or fail automatically?
At submit time a bunch of things are checked to help determine which queue the link goes into: things like submitter's track record with past submissions, if the file is a media file, etc. There's an element of randomness, too. Also, the number of links waiting for admins in the main queue is taken into account to help offload pressure from the relatively small number of admins, though that's less important these days now that we keep the main queue under 15 or 20 links at any given time. There were times in the far past -- before the Alpha Queue and before domain blacklisting and user submissions caps -- that there would be over 100 links waiting approval.
This is pretty interesting stuff, how long has it taken for LS to evolve into todays version?
Fuking forever (c. Nov 2002) and it never stops. I feel like I'm doing a magazine interview. :CLAMSHADES:
____________________
slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you. |
| |
coknurmowth
Crisco Fux SSHOLEPosts: 127 Registered: 10/20/2005 Offline
|
6/7/2007 at 07:23 |
I have come to LS all week and looked at links but not voted on any in the AQ. As the week went by the links waiting for me to vote on in the AQ progressively got larger. I now have 37 links waiting for vote...
Does the AQ grab random links to vote on each time I visit LS and hold them in que until I vote?
thanks again.
____________________
|
| |
vasudeva
Bad Taste in your Mouth SSHOLEPosts: 4540 Registered: 3/8/2002 Offline
|
6/7/2007 at 11:52 |
coknurmowth: I have come to LS all week and looked at links but not voted on any in the AQ. As the week went by the links waiting for me to vote on in the AQ progressively got larger. I now have 37 links waiting for vote...
Does the AQ grab random links to vote on each time I visit LS and hold them in que until I vote?
Aw hayl no.
The Alpha Queue is filling up because people are voting less, because it's summer and it's nice out and there are barbecues and horseflies and LinkSwarm sucks.
There are two queues: the main queue and the Alpha queue. Depending on a number of factors, a link, upon submission, is placed in one or the other. Also, admins can push a link from the main queue into the Alpha queue if a little faux democracy is called for.
Links in either queue stay there until they get voted out.
In the main queue, this takes one admin vote.
In the Alpha queue, this takes a consensus vote.
The only extent to which the concept of "your" Alpha queue makes sense is that once you've voted on a link sitting in the Alpha queue, the queue will not show you that link again. You won't see it until it gets processed out onto the front page (or ever, in the case of deletion). In this regard, a special view is being created for you and served to you, but not really. Consider it like looking at the forums. When you read a thread, it is marked as read and the link turns a different color in your browser, but it's still technically there. Everyone else sees it. People who haven't read it see it in a different color. But everyone's seeing the same stuff.
Still no takers for a compilation of Alpha concepts? I don't expect it to be 100% accurate; I just don't have the time lately.
____________________
slippedhole> I am on to you and your evil intentions. I am the true protector of this website and am willing to do battle with you. |
| |
|
