Re^9: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order)

in reply to Re^8: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ...
in thread And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ...

Defaulting Note Ordering in User Settings to "Best First"

Yeah, I've long felt we should do that. I even quite recently wrote a patch to do that (or at least part of that) and left it sitting there, unapplied, deciding how (or even if) I should advertise it to get more feedback on it.

It seems to me to be a pretty good idea. Anonymous visitors and new (registered) users are the ones who would most benefit from showing notes sorted by reputation instead of by time. (It is also pretty trivial to implement.)

In a demonstration of irony, within only a couple of hours, my patch was downvoted and no other feedback ever arrived in any way. I find it tempting to claim to have drawn some insight from this incident. But in the end, I've decided that a single downvote just doesn't contain enough data or significance to hang even a facetious conclusion upon.

- tye

Comment on Re^9: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by Arunbear (Prior) on Jul 06, 2015 at 12:59 UTC
Stack Overflow orders answers by reputation, and I can remember quite a few occasions where the highest rep answer wasn't the most useful one for the problem I searched for. So I'm not sure it would be better, but I'm not against trying it out here. If it were implemented here, we ought to make it clear to viewers that what they're seeing isn't a chronological listing.	[reply]
Re^11: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by tye (Sage) on Jul 07, 2015 at 04:52 UTC
I can remember quite a few occasions where the highest rep answer wasn't the most useful one for the problem I searched for And you remember few occasions where the most quickly posted answer wasn't the most useful one for the problem you searched for? Otherwise, you present the weakest of arguments against the proposal. So, add to that "I don't want to use that configuration", which is not an argument against it since registered users have had the option to choose from several configurations for a decade already. Also, one downvote lacking any accompanying explanation. I think the arguments "for" are winning rather decisively, despite their quite modest showing. - tye	[reply]
Re^12: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 07, 2015 at 07:47 UTC
...I think the arguments "for" are winning rather decisively, despite their quite modest showing. Current view for me, chronological, doesn't say "replies are ordered chronologically", although timestamps are shown, and the nodeids increase If you switch the default ordering for me, I would find a note explaining the ordering useful	[reply]
Re^12: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by Arunbear (Prior) on Jul 08, 2015 at 13:10 UTC
And you remember few occasions where the most quickly posted answer wasn't the most useful one for the problem you searched for? Indeed. But with the new ordering (assuming I was using it), I'd still have to read all the replies, hence my doubt that it would be an improvement over the old ordering. You mentioned "Anonymous visitors and new (registered) users are the ones who would most benefit from showing notes sorted by reputation instead of by time.", but didn't explain where the benefit comes from.	[reply]
Re^13: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (tl;dr) by tye (Sage) on Jul 08, 2015 at 14:18 UTC
Re^14: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (tl;dr) by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 08, 2015 at 17:17 UTC
Re^14: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (tl;dr) by Arunbear (Prior) on Jul 08, 2015 at 17:26 UTC
Re^11: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by jdporter (Paladin) on Jul 07, 2015 at 16:29 UTC
If it were implemented here, we ought to make it clear to viewers that what they're seeing isn't a chronological listing. Done. :-) I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.	[reply]
Re^12: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by chacham (Prior) on Jul 07, 2015 at 17:54 UTC
Wow, thing actually do get done here. :) And here i thought we just liked to talk about it instead. (Yes, yes, i'm joking.) Nice being one of the ascended, eh?	[reply]
Re^12: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by Anonymous Monk on Jul 07, 2015 at 19:59 UTC
That's great, thank you!	[reply]
Re^10: And here's why I think "downvotes" should be eliminated, or tabulated separately ... (node order) by chacham (Prior) on Jul 02, 2015 at 14:23 UTC
Personally, i don't like it. However, that's because i would not want that to be the option for me. I like to see it in the raw (as long as it isn't abusive. But, that's just me. (Expressed to get my bias out of the way.) As for this being a default on something that is easily changeable, would match other sites. I believe Microsoft uses this approach in their forums, with the justification that most people who come to the site just want the answer. That makes a lot for sense here as well. I don't know what you mean by this mysterious "vote" you refer to. :) Was it something in PMD? If not, PMD has been quite active of late. This ought to make a good discussion, especially for something you already wrote. That means no "yeah, but who's gonna write it" complaints.	[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion