Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
40

[Meta] Are we using PaleoHacks VOTING system appropriately?

by (18397)
Updated September 16, 2014 at 7:20 PM
Created March 21, 2011 at 5:56 PM

I recognize full well that this could be viewed as a highly subjective question. Everyone has their own opinion and perspective. Rock on.

But from what I'm observing in the voting patterns with regards to questions specifically, it seems that the 'fun' questions, or those that whet the intellectual appetite of our readers, get the most attention and the most upvotes. I can't help but notice that most people seem to vote based on whether or not they "like" or "agree with" a specific question's premise. That certainly holds its own place of importance and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that... other than maybe this.... that many of the questions that pose direct and valuable intrigue into some of the most important aspects and nutrition related topics of eating Paleo are getting sort of 'ignored' and fall into the black hole of PaleoHacks too quickly.

I ask a question about the horrible things we all ate Pre-Paleo, and people go nuts with it. Ok cool. Fun stuff, right? But when I ask if the Vitamin E in almonds protects against oxidation (of which I did not find a substantial discussion elsewhere on PH), doesn't it seem that this could be quite an important thing to consider when deciding whether almonds are to be feared as much as many people do, given the attention we place on PUFA combined with so many peoples' love for almonds/almond butter/almond flour? (btw I'm just using that Q as an example... as it was just posed an hour ago). But the manner in which I pose the question insinuates my personal "stance" or answer because of the power of suggestion, meaning that people will naturally think that "obviously Jack Kronk believes the Vitamin E in almonds DOES protect against PUFA oxidation". So then if you upvote the question, you are "agreeing" with Jack Kronk or saying YES to the question.

How about upvoting a particular question based on the value of the question itself, and therefore its potential for valuable answers that people will be able to draw from, regardless of what your personal stance may be? This way, questions that hold a high or even moderate importance will get upvoted and encouraged more, even if not many people necessarily "know" how to answer them. This might also encourage people to dig in for a good sound answer too, because if people see a question upvoted 5 times, yet there are no answers, you can bet your bottom that when someone does come up with a good answer, it will be voted up according to the perceived value of the question.

What do you think of this?

B0454de6d4f4cdd9ca2e59021dc105bf
606 · June 21, 2011 at 3:55 AM

I signed up just yesterday and I gotta admit, it's fun getting points and badges! For the jokey-type questions, it might help if people used the down vote more often. I think people may be reluctant to use down votes because they don't want to seem all negative. Perhaps instead people should think of down-voting as a way of letting the genuinely useful questions rise to the top.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · May 18, 2011 at 1:38 AM

PM - this is actually a decent comment from you. Given the very topic of your answer and that you actually do have an opinion, it seems that some voting on your part would follow. I suppose time will tell, sir.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · May 17, 2011 at 8:29 PM

saintpuffy, oh i totally agree that we still need to upvote the fun stuff. Good point. and thanks!

B9cc28905ec54389c47cde031d709703
3743 · March 29, 2011 at 8:11 PM

I like the 3rd paragraph, I've asked and mentioned a couple ideas that would require a reevaluation of things and I get a complete shaft because--and this is a guess--there are the paleo facists who don't want to address a potentially new paradigm. I definately dig what your saying and I dig your desire to improve the quality of voting and rating and faciliting a community that addresses even the hard questions.

B1fcaceba952861d0324bdb291edbbe0
3159 · March 24, 2011 at 12:48 AM

Thanks Ignacio. :)

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd
3509 · March 22, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Allie this is a very good answer!

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · March 22, 2011 at 2:04 PM

that is very true that it's not about the votes, but i do believe questions and answers with more votes attract more interest based on curiosity. like "oh look! everybody thinks this is worth looking at. I wanna see too!"

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64
11478 · March 22, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Great point Kate! The site is not supposed to be about the votes.

D67e7b481854b02110d5a5b21d6789b1
4086 · March 22, 2011 at 1:33 AM

thanks, I am going to try the bounty because I really want to know the answer to my question.

47a42b6be94caf700fce9509e38bb6a4
9647 · March 22, 2011 at 12:04 AM

@Texasleah, I think that is totally fine. I think it's also OK to edit the question with additional material, like: "here is why I really want an answer to this question, because it's relevant to issues x and y"; or "maybe I was too vague, what I really want is ..." Most questions get lots of answers, so I don't think it's unfair to bump up one that doesn't. But bounties are also great. I think people get psyched when they see them, it makes things fun.

A89f9751a97c3082802dc0bcbe4e9208
13993 · March 21, 2011 at 10:38 PM

Intent and reality don't *have* to be mutually exclusive... ;P

D67e7b481854b02110d5a5b21d6789b1
4086 · March 21, 2011 at 9:46 PM

So if I have a question that has zero answers and I provide a bounty that brings it back to the attention of hackers again? Is this proper etiquette? I don't wish to be obnoxious :)

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · March 21, 2011 at 9:01 PM

seems to me that "whet" is winning... i think you were right Ed. @Paul... "editing war". lol.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · March 21, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Gillie intent and reality are two mutually exclusive concepts. And this post proves that unintended consequences do happen.

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64
11478 · March 21, 2011 at 8:51 PM

Agree that more prolific voting would smooth things over. It would help prevent members from feeling "ignored."

47a42b6be94caf700fce9509e38bb6a4
9647 · March 21, 2011 at 8:50 PM

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whet

47a42b6be94caf700fce9509e38bb6a4
9647 · March 21, 2011 at 8:50 PM

Hmmm ... I think it should be "whet." Let's have a Wikipedia-style editing war!

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64
11478 · March 21, 2011 at 8:47 PM

@Jack, our comments crossed in cyberspace. I've already changed it back to the original.

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64
11478 · March 21, 2011 at 8:42 PM

@Jack, I'm sorry, I thought you meant to use the common phrase. Maybe "wet the ... whistle" is more appropriate, but doesn't sound as well when read aloud. I'll change it back.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · March 21, 2011 at 8:41 PM

nevermind... reading back through it again, i think 'whet your appetite" is correct. thx!

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · March 21, 2011 at 8:33 PM

ed, i read through this entire page (at the end of comment) and several others before writing "wet" instead of "whet", but maybe I misunderstood. when i saw that "whet your appetite" meant "sharpen your appetite", I figured that wouldn't be right. check it out... http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/whet%20your%20appetite.html

100fd85230060e754fc13394eee6d6f1
18671 · March 21, 2011 at 7:58 PM

I often do not understand why some particular answers get upvoted. I usually upvote a question if I'm interested in the answer. Sometimes I forget, though.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · March 21, 2011 at 7:46 PM

i wonder that too leah, especially since the only way to 'bump' the question or bring attention to it is to edit it or answer it yourself. (or provide a bounty I suppose)

A89f9751a97c3082802dc0bcbe4e9208
13993 · March 21, 2011 at 7:44 PM

Patrik's hope for the site from the beginning has been that the 'users' *are* the 'management.' ;)

1f96ce108240f19345c05704c7709dad
1061 · March 21, 2011 at 7:39 PM

ditto, ditto, ditto

D67e7b481854b02110d5a5b21d6789b1
4086 · March 21, 2011 at 7:38 PM

I often wonder if your question did not get answered at all, will it ever be seen now that it is in the black hole of doom?

D30ff86ad2c1f3b43b99aed213bcf461
12174 · March 21, 2011 at 7:06 PM

I love tacking a bounty to questions! Just sometimes wish that I could do it right away when drafting the question so that I don't have to remember to come back to it two days later ...also would give answerers a more even exposure to answer-readers within the bounty context.

77732bf6bf2b8a360f523ef87c3b7523
6157 · March 21, 2011 at 7:00 PM

I think all of this is great stuff. I don't think you will be successful in getting a large # of people to change their behavior on this. The ones that get you, will do it or are already doing it. The ones that don't get it -- are too numerous. Just my opinion. Welcome to the Internet!

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a
919 · March 21, 2011 at 6:38 PM

I wouldn't mind a few more - must raise my sights

39a1a0bc7855c084ac59df60fdf9c0dd
1502 · March 21, 2011 at 6:24 PM

Great comment!!

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · March 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM

and asking the questions over and over again seems topiss some off......i love it because knowledge evolves sec to sec. What was true last week may no longer be. Case in point.....look at the thread yesterday on hair loss. It went from a hair loss post to one of fulminate undiagnosed hypothyroidism......causing the hair loss. So I think some of the rules of how this place was designed will need to evolve too. Because the users will do it if the management wont.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · March 21, 2011 at 6:08 PM

Value Jack is in the eye of the beholder. To see the true value of a comment one has to understand the 3 ft view and the 30000 ft view and be able to be mentally facile to move amongst the layer of chaos and complexity. Some of the more interesting stuff on this site is not well read and infact dies on the vine way too often.....but I think it happens because many dont realize how germaine it is to what they are trying to do. I think the more one reads and asks questions the more one will come understand what is important. As Paleohacks evolve I believe its species will too.

Total Views
1.3K

Recent Activity
B1fcaceba952861d0324bdb291edbbe0

Last Activity
34D AGO

Followers
0

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

9 Answers

A89f9751a97c3082802dc0bcbe4e9208
12
13993 · March 21, 2011 at 6:10 PM

How you suggest we use 'voting' is how I have been using voting. I can't speak for others.

I do think we, as a community, could vote on answers more prolifically. Good answers don't get nearly as many votes as they could, or as I hope they would.

Also, for the record, few people seem to be using bounties.

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64
11478 · March 21, 2011 at 8:51 PM

Agree that more prolific voting would smooth things over. It would help prevent members from feeling "ignored."

D30ff86ad2c1f3b43b99aed213bcf461
12174 · March 21, 2011 at 7:06 PM

I love tacking a bounty to questions! Just sometimes wish that I could do it right away when drafting the question so that I don't have to remember to come back to it two days later ...also would give answerers a more even exposure to answer-readers within the bounty context.

2f54dbe892ec89b12d1db686568e885a
919 · March 21, 2011 at 6:38 PM

I wouldn't mind a few more - must raise my sights

8f08fb03fc5c2f44b7d5357e8a3ab1c5
8
393 · March 21, 2011 at 6:42 PM

I think I'll use my voting power to +1 this question purely on its merits :^).

I have felt that some people do read WAY too much into a question and assume a lot without any basis, but that is merely a function of how well (or not) they use critical thinking and how emotionally biased they are.

Then there are people who toe their particular sub-Paleo tribal line with almost religious fervor. I wonder if they ever stop and reflect that most of us have become some kind of Paleo by questioning and being open-minded, and not by forever blindly accepting assertions as universal truths? But seeing as most humans have evolved to be very susceptible to the lemming effect and to trying to maintain a fixed and comfortable world-view, I doubt that any new site policy would change this, short of turning Paleohacks into an elitist and hand-picked bunch of rational-thinking people. This would probably defeat the purpose of having Paleohacks in the first place.

Instead, I say use the downvote button on answers that preach too much and reveal too little real information, in order to make people think twice before clicking that post button. Again, your bringing this topic of emotionally biased voting out into the light is much appreciated.

1f96ce108240f19345c05704c7709dad
1061 · March 21, 2011 at 7:39 PM

ditto, ditto, ditto

B1fcaceba952861d0324bdb291edbbe0
7
3159 · March 22, 2011 at 12:04 PM

The only things I can think of to remedy this are:

Perhaps there could be a 'like' tab near each post and/or thread in conjunction with the up-vote button. Thus, members could choose to merely 'like', or as you (Jack) pointed out, 'agree' with the response rather than up-vote merely for that reason.

There could be a limited number of 'up-votes' allowed per day (maybe even on an increasing scale in respect to one's reputation) and it would make members more sparing of clicking that lovely little triangle.

Also, there could be a prompt upon clicking the up-vote button reminding members what the up-votes are for and if they are using them accordingly. I think this would get annoying, but an idea nonetheless. It could always be a one day only thing.

And Jack, I understand where you are coming from. I agree in some instances (e. g. important physiological, biochemical, toxin related questions) where threads are not up-voted where it would be a benefit to the paleo community if they were. Maybe just by making this question you've helped elucidate that.

Hmm, and one last idea. For the questions you mentioned, that seem to lack sufficient attention (when it seems like they should), maybe there could be one more tab on the question home page for such questions. Thread starters could enter the question, and if it isn't getting sufficient attention, they could make a comment to the moderators explaining why they think it should and ask if it can be put in that special tab? Just an idea.

Oh, or maybe there could be a tab for such questions for a limited amount of time to draw attention to them ...?

Alright, I'll end my brain storming. Paleo makes my noggin feel like it's on steroids. XD

I like paleo hacks the way it is, but I'm new here, so perhaps I don't have as good an idea of the inner-workings as y'all do.

Cheers!

B1fcaceba952861d0324bdb291edbbe0
3159 · March 24, 2011 at 12:48 AM

Thanks Ignacio. :)

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd
3509 · March 22, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Allie this is a very good answer!

Bad3a78e228c67a7513c28f17c36b3cf
3
1387 · March 22, 2011 at 12:22 PM

I confess I am sometimes surprised at what gets a lot of votes. But I don't find votes or lack of votes puts me off from the general usefulness of the site or any particular question and set of answers.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · March 22, 2011 at 2:04 PM

that is very true that it's not about the votes, but i do believe questions and answers with more votes attract more interest based on curiosity. like "oh look! everybody thinks this is worth looking at. I wanna see too!"

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64
11478 · March 22, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Great point Kate! The site is not supposed to be about the votes.

307c9129b8e1dd0433a3fbb16e0c4a92
2
78 · March 22, 2011 at 11:04 AM

i'm new here, 22 days on 30 day paleo challenge.

i found found this site and the users invaluable to my learning curve and i guess i read questions of relevance to me and vote on the answers according to whichever one i feel answers the questions is the most relevant/valuable way (to me and to what i assume the questioner is asking in the first place).

i try not to weigh in on things that i have little to no knowledge about but when i do find something new/cool (usually about diet, lifestyle and the historical evoltuion of both, not the 'silly/fun' food Q's) i do vote, albeit only occasionally. i don't think i realised i can vote on the q's themselves, so will start doing this now!

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
2
25467 · March 21, 2011 at 6:09 PM

Value Jack, is in the eye of the beholder. To see the true value of a comment one has to understand the 3 ft view and the 30000 ft view and be able to be mentally facile to move amongst the layer of chaos and complexity. Some of the more interesting stuff on this site is not well read and infact dies on the vine way too often.....but I think it happens because many dont realize how germaine it is to what they are trying to do. I think the more one reads and asks questions the more one will come understand what is important. As Paleohacks evolves I believe "its" species will too

A89f9751a97c3082802dc0bcbe4e9208
13993 · March 21, 2011 at 10:38 PM

Intent and reality don't *have* to be mutually exclusive... ;P

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · March 21, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Gillie intent and reality are two mutually exclusive concepts. And this post proves that unintended consequences do happen.

A89f9751a97c3082802dc0bcbe4e9208
13993 · March 21, 2011 at 7:44 PM

Patrik's hope for the site from the beginning has been that the 'users' *are* the 'management.' ;)

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117
25467 · March 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM

and asking the questions over and over again seems topiss some off......i love it because knowledge evolves sec to sec. What was true last week may no longer be. Case in point.....look at the thread yesterday on hair loss. It went from a hair loss post to one of fulminate undiagnosed hypothyroidism......causing the hair loss. So I think some of the rules of how this place was designed will need to evolve too. Because the users will do it if the management wont.

85026a0abe715229761956fbbee1cba0
1
78417 · May 18, 2011 at 12:04 AM

I have also experienced and thought upon this issue. It is my opinion that those questions that are more UNIVERSAL in scope are not answered as often despite their value for all people not simply:"check out what I ate Yesterday DUDE(pardon the 80s vocab)." Maybe the PALEOs should focus on addressing things that can reach the most amount of people and orient their voting in this direction: ie. greatest good for the greatest number.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · May 18, 2011 at 1:38 AM

PM - this is actually a decent comment from you. Given the very topic of your answer and that you actually do have an opinion, it seems that some voting on your part would follow. I suppose time will tell, sir.

13db020c06c22c2f8b129034ddc013e4
1
340 · May 17, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Good point, Jack, and agree need to upvote substantial questions.

Still, good to upvote fun stuff, since it draws eyeballs from latest Numa-Numa video, might bring people deeper into the scene.

Af1d286f0fd5c3949f59b4edf4d892f5
18397 · May 17, 2011 at 8:29 PM

saintpuffy, oh i totally agree that we still need to upvote the fun stuff. Good point. and thanks!

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd
1
3509 · March 22, 2011 at 2:17 PM

The way voting is being used combines several different things: if you think the question is relevant, often if you agree with the point of view that is being expressed or suggested, sometimes if you think the question is deep or kind of fun, or even very well written. Yes a question could be very deep and attract few votes, perhaps because it is too technically loaded, perhaps because it suggests a potential flaw with something that is agreed by the majority here. Anyway I think the same may happen with any voting system.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account