Lowering individual vote temps
We'll be lowering the vote temp slightly for individual member votes and deals. The temperature for each deal is dynamically calculated based on several variables but obviously the biggest one is the effect of a member vote. Each member has their own voting power based on their historical interaction on HUKD and deals they've found.
As the site gets bigger and more members vote there is "inflation" in the deal temp as it becomes easier for a deal to become hotter. We play with the hot deal tipping point but also with member vote influence to deflate this from time to time. Right now I think there are too many deals getting hot so we are going to tweak that down a bit (i.e. there's already 5 pages of hot deals today and really we know there aren't that many truly hot deals in a day).
Anyways, this is just a heads up to let you all know :)
All Comments (275)
Jump to unread Post a CommentI am quite surprised that those posting about ‘niches’, ‘those who take the time’, ‘user-groups’, ‘serial cold voters’, ‘specialities’, ‘expert advice in comments’ algorithms, scaled and related voting and all manner of other stuff, haven’t greeted my suggestion ^^^ with open arms.
In consequence, I now outline a number of the possible benefits.
If the voting is removed from adjacent to the title and placed with the reply box then pretty much all those aims, except the algorithms (surely algorithms would be a more difficult and thus buggy process?) , will be achieved. Only the most serious, serial, cold voter is going to open and scroll down to vote cold in each and every thread and if the cold button is lit then that member will soon find s/he has some explaining to do.
Specialities, niches etc will be catered for as they will be automatically attracted to the threads in which they have an interest. This I would say is already the case in some areas of interest e.g. computers, where members give a lot of helpful explanations.
It will make it far more likely that a considered vote will be reached if a member has to pass the posted comments in a thread. Also they may notice e.g. that there is actually only one such deal item and it has already been snapped up.
Members will also be more likely to find and to post other suggestions for outlets or similar deals if, for instance they are 100 miles away from the nearest Retailer X.
I would suggest that members would quite quickly prefer threads listing a number of deals and vote them hot, whilst individual deals for everyday items would require them to open and scroll in lots of threads!!
Members will need to make positive choices to vote on a deal and the number of hot deals should thus decrease, whilst what one might call genuinely hot deals – the one–offs, the real bargains would have more discussion, more prominence and a hotter outcome.
Edited By: chesso on May 09, 2011 00:38: 184
:)
1999 actually...
===============================================================================
CACTUSHOP v6 ASP SHOPPING CART
©1999-2006 CACTUSOFT INTERNATIONAL FZ-LLC. - WWW.CACTUSHOP.COM
All rights reserved.
===============================================================================
BFN,
fp.
...It will make it far more likely that a considered vote will be reached if a member has to pass the posted comments in a thread. Also they may notice e.g. that there is actually only one such deal item and it has already been snapped up....
I suspect most will just use [CTRL]+[END] on their keyboard to move the browser page to the bottom in order to vote.
Sorry, I wasn't clear what you meant by "actually only one such deal item and it has already been snapped up".
Please could you try to explain again/differently? Thanks.
BFN,
fp.
Also, did you mean comment #184?
BFN,
fp.
Sorry, I wasn't clear what you meant by "actually only one such deal item and it has already been snapped up".
Please could you try to explain again/differently? Thanks.
BFN,
fp.
If a member is totally determined to vote without any reference to the information in the OP or the thread and is set against any type of considered response then that is possible but the lit button would, at least, reveal whether the member voted hot or cold. IMO it is not 'most' who will do what you suggest.
Re the explanation which I will endeavour to try to do differently:
one such deal item = a single object/opportunity/event, as described in the title and linked to in the OP
already = has previously occurred
snapped up = quickly bought ( here it is understood that it has been bought by someone else; 'snapped up' is an idiomatic expression)
.... and thus out of stock and unavailable to further potential purchasers.
This may be an extreme example, but I do often see that deals have continued to gain heat when the deal has in fact expired and that information, OOS, has been in the thread for some time.
I hope you understand that this was simply an illustration of the benefits of the simple system I advocate.
Yes, #184 - thanks
Edited By: chesso on May 09, 2011 00:44: usual typos
I was in touch and explained the situation to you, firstly upon the thread removal, as per normal procedures, then by PM.
Sorry, I wasn't clear what you meant by "actually only one such deal item and it has already been snapped up".
Please could you try to explain again/differently? Thanks.
If a member is totally determined to vote without any reference to the information in the OP or the thread and is set against any type of considered response then that is possible but the lit button would, at least, reveal whether the member voted hot or cold. IMO it is not 'most' who will do what you suggest.
Re the explanation which I will endeavour to try to do differently:
one such deal item = a single object/opportunity/event, as described in the title and linked to in the OP
already = has previously occurred
snapped up = quickly bought ( here it is understood that it has been bought by someone else; 'snapped up' is an idiomatic expression)
.... and thus out of stock and unavailable to further potential purchasers.
This may be an extreme example, but I do often see that deals have continued to gain heat when the deal has in fact expired and that information, OOS, has been in the thread for some time.
I hope you understand that this was simply an illustration of the benefits of the simple system I advocate.
Yes, #184 - thanks
Thank you for the English lesson; the meaning of each part of the sentence was not the issue. The context in which you were using the activity described was my problem, but you hit upon my misunderstanding with your answer in any respect.
The reason deals gain heat when items go out of stock is sometimes (often?) because of the process of expiring "deal" listings. The member that created a "deal" should be able to expire it without supporting members as 'backup'. If established members have been provided with higher levels of voting power (temperature values) then perhaps they can also be trusted to expire "deals" with a single click (rather than waiting for like-minded individuals so that the tally of those clicking "expire" reaches three [or more]).
That said, I have expired something in error previously. I realised my mistake immediately & tried to correct my fault by contacting the Moderators & posting a follow-up comment in the specific "deal" thread... but the creator of the listing was far from happy. Of course it took more than just my click of the 'expire' link to close the listing, but because I had commented in the thread I was singled-out.
(This, I think, is relevant with regards your suggestion about voters having to leave a comment; some may not feel that they wish to disclose their affinity to a certain product because of the responses they may get from other members)
Even after the "deal" was reinstated as 'active' again, I received abusive messages (via "Private Message"). It was a genuine mistake on my part as I mis-read the "deal" description.
Also of note: if a member has clicked 'expire' once & the "deal" has then been made 'active' again (perhaps following an item coming back into stock), that member is not able to click 'expire' at a later date.
I too see many "deals" gaining heat because of the inability of all visitors to the listing to be able to read the comments added. This is particularly noticeable within listings that describe a single item available in a single branch of a retailer somewhere in the UK. Store-specific discounted goods (primarily in Supermarkets; Tesco, typically), or items that have been incorrectly priced, or even items that were sold at a reduced price in error by the retailer's staff are prime examples of "deal" listings that reach a few hundred positive degrees when only a single person has been able to buy at the price quoted. Asking for documentary proof is met with a variety of (often negative) replies & amongst all the exchanges the real message of "This needs expiring" is missed.
I really do think moving the voting interface to the bottom of the page will be met with resistance especially by those that use the mobile version of the site & now have to scroll their browser window some distance.
Are you proposing that a comment can only be left with a vote, or that once a member has voted (with an accompanying comment), then they are then able to leave as many follow-up comments as they wish?
I can see the benefit to your suggestion about the enforced comment with a vote but, again, this is prone to misuse as some members will not add anything worthwhile in the text they provide to accompany the vote.
Additionally, if there is no (visible) penalty for repeatedly voting cold then members will continue to do so. What do you propose if a member continues to "cold vote" without a valid reason? Who decides what is a valid reason if the criteria for voting is purely subjective?
Making a once anonymous method of voting into an explicitly visible activity may also alienate some members (much like the change to the "Like this comment" status visible after it was initially hidden & after it replaced the member's profile [private] only indication with the "reputation" system). "Visible voting" may cause an overall drop in voting across all listings; so, yes, to come back to a "benefit of the simple system you advocate", this may satisfy what Admin was hoping to achieve.
However, if it means a thread is then full of "me too" [cold] or "agreed" [hot] kind of comments then the overall quality of the threads diminish as a medium to gain an insight into a product without having to wade through meaningless text.
As you mentioned, with a finite supply of an item (at the price) listed, time is often critical in securing a "deal".
Scrolling through a few pages of trivial text to reach something meaningful may be the difference between gaining a product/service/whatever or not.
If a member cannot add a comment without a vote cast either previously or at the time that the comment is submitted then it will be difficult to pose a query about the item being listed in the "deal" prior to voting.
If a member cannot ask a question without casting a vote then they will vote one way or another & then they may need to retract their vote when another member has responded with further details. Forcing another member to vote in order to respond to a query is also a step backwards from what we currently have in place.
In practice, only the most conscientious of members will retract their vote if it has been cast incorrectly following clarification of a query.
The resultant temperature of that listing is then not accurate.
BFN,
fp.
Why you would refer to the infraction procedure or a non relevant point defeats me and deflects from the nature of your query, so we'll drop that point if you don't mind.
We take several factors into account should we decide to pull a merchant listing, these may include a lack of company reg info on their website, not being listed at companies house, etc. In addition, the poorly designed website only adds to the lack of confidence. Whilst this shouldn't be taken as a judgement on the authenticity of the merchant in question, we do have minimum criteria which needs to be satisfied in order for a thread to remain. We are happy to review in due course, but it's not for us to chase up.
Thank you in advance of your replies.
We will review merchants as and when deals are submitted. If merchant sites lack sufficient information then we see it as their issue, not ours, to chase up.
Edited By: aScottishBloke on May 09, 2011 10:27: typo
The body of my reply ^^^ following the word 'explanation' was the different explanation.
I agree with you re expiring see my thread here.
Re compulsory voting and comments, I do not think that either should be compulsory and I haven't suggested that they should be.
The lit button would indicate the vote.
If a comment must be put (for functional reasons that I could not begin to understand) into the reply box for it to function, then there is nothing to stop members putting dots or whatever as per the update explanation boxes, when a reply is edited.
There would be no compunction to vote; a comment can be made, without voting, as is the case at the moment.
Re 'missing out on a deal ' due to the time taken for scrolling. A member can continue to go straight to the deal, of course and take advantage of what is on offer. A comment and a vote after looking at the actual deal, not just the OP's version of it, would probably be more useful to others, as indeed the feedback re whether the deal has been fulfilled, what the product was like etc etc is useful now.
As to the overall thread quality - it is difficult to envisage that the system could, in fact, lower the quality!! Lots of the red hot deals on here are a multi-page string of 'great, ordered' or similar. That is perfect in many ways - succint and bumps the thread in 'discussions'. As to the quality of comment in other threads - I make no comment!
Serial (or specific to OP) cold voters will become apparent and can be reported for mod action. Anonymous voting is, at present, more a tool for bad than for good.
It is a good thing if members think twice about what they are voting/commenting. The system would likely mean that members become better educated (not meaning to be condescending here) in voting and 'what HUKD is about'.
Mistakes happen all the time - this system at least means that if the wrong button is pressed then the member can immediately comment that it was a mistake. I would not want the mods to be spending time reversing hot/cold votes!!
So to summarise:
This is a simple to use system which IMO achieves the aims outlined by Admin.
It is simply that you can only vote hot or cold using a button , similar to 'like' but when pressed it stays lit for all to see.
A member who wishes to vote can only do so by opening a thread and using the reply box. Maybe something would be required within the reply box - that is a technical problem, about which, again, I know nothing. Anything else like reading the thread or putting a meaningful comment is voluntary.
Edited By: chesso on May 09, 2011 10:35
Thank you for your prompt replies aScottishBloke.
Please forgive my digression to the main topic and please feel free to delete my recent posts into this thread, they do not add anything to the main theme.
Edited By: Blasphemous on May 09, 2011 11:14: To state I am happy for my posts to be deleted.
User groups and similar would mean that I might miss out on a deal.
This site can be buggy enough without adding in extra logarithms to alter the deal temp.
Only being able to vote through posting a comment is time consuming, and I'd rarely add temp.
I vote if I see a good deal, ie if I know about that area of goods/services and think it's a good price for that product. I vote cold ones which I think are bad deals for the product. If I don't like the product/ I have no idea about the product, I don't vote.
The site needs to be better explained to new members. I'm not sure if there is a welcome section for new users, but making them click through a few pages before they can start posting would be a good idea, explaining different sections (deals, vouchers etc), how to post, the fact that if you want to see all deals you have to click new.
The text only option does not appear to provide the voting buttons and therefore if i see a deal i like or dislike I dont bother voting as I have to open up each deal to vote !!
My point is how many others like me would like to vote hot or not - but just dont as its a bit of a faff,
can you add the voting buttons to the text only option please.
I actually think quite alot of deals lose votes because this function is missing.
The body of my reply ^^^ following the word 'explanation' was the different explanation.
Yes, I know. Thanks. Again a lesson in sentence construction was not needed.
I agree with you re expiring see my thread here.
You should see I posted a few comments in that thread.
Re compulsory voting and comments, I do not think that either should be compulsory and I haven't suggested that they should be.
The lit button would indicate the vote.
I obviously misunderstand what you meant in the opening sentence of comment #184 as you seem to suggest that a comment is necessary to vote...
Yes, I agree.
...hence why I was seeking clarification of what you meant as that thought occurred to me as well (based on what I thought you meant in comment #184 regarding having to post text along with a vote).
This is a simple to use system which IMO achieves the aims outlined by Admin.
It is simply that you can only vote hot or cold using a button , similar to 'like' but when pressed it stays lit for all to see.
Sorry to labour this, but I'm still not understanding the relevance of the "lit" button to indicate how a member voted if the vote cast is not associated with a member's name somewhere in the "deal" thread comments.
Are you suggesting that a deal with temperature of 400 degrees but without a single comment from any of the voters has a list of the hundreds of members & how they voted?
A member who wishes to vote can only do so by opening a thread and using the reply box. Maybe something would be required within the reply box - that is a technical problem, about which, again, I know nothing. Anything else like reading the thread or putting a meaningful comment is voluntary.
Now I am confused.
Does a member need to post a comment in order to vote, or not?
What is the "reply box" being used for if not to comment? You mention a "lit" button. I am guessing you mean after a vote is cast the way in which a member voted is highlighted. Who sees this "lit" button (indicator)? Just the member casting the vote? How does this help with serial cold or serial hot voting if the way in which a particular member voted is only seen by that member?
(Admin & the Moderators can still see how a member has voted using their own tools)
Again, I am sorry if it is just me that is not understanding your proposal.
With the absence of comments from others it would seem to be the case.
BFN,
fp.
The text only option does not appear to provide the voting buttons and therefore if i see a deal i like or dislike I dont bother voting as I have to open up each deal to vote !!
My point is how many others like me would like to vote hot or not - but just dont as its a bit of a faff,
can you add the voting buttons to the text only option please.
I actually think quite alot of deals lose votes because this function is missing.
The lit button would indicate the vote.
It is simply that you can only vote hot or cold using a button , similar to 'like' but when pressed it stays lit for all to see.
A member who wishes to vote can only do so by opening a thread and using the reply box. Maybe something would be required within the reply box - that is a technical problem, about which, again, I know nothing. Anything else like reading the thread or putting a meaningful comment is voluntary.
and now I am giving up
Edited By: chesso on May 09, 2011 21:35
Edited By: Gunner4Life on May 09, 2011 21:59: o
It's come up before. I don't think people should vote just based on the title (which is all you see in text only).
The idea about putting voting by the comments is not bad - I would worry though it would make voting too hard. I guess I'm somewhere between not wanting it in text only but also not wanting it in a really inaccessible place either.
The lit button would indicate the vote.
It is simply that you can only vote hot or cold using a button , similar to 'like' but when pressed it stays lit for all to see.
A member who wishes to vote can only do so by opening a thread and using the reply box. Maybe something would be required within the reply box - that is a technical problem, about which, again, I know nothing. Anything else like reading the thread or putting a meaningful comment is voluntary.
and now I am giving up
You are not flogging a dead horse... you seem to be missing my point:
You need to leave a comment in order for others to see your vote (by way of the "hot" or "cold" symbols in your example above).
Your avatar does not appear in a thread for other members to see the vote you cast without a comment.
BFN,
fp.