There are many new question, even limited to a field. A new method, to see which one is interesting, could be to display the reputation of the person who upvoted and has the largest reputation among upvoters. (Or, to protect privacy, some rounding of this number.) Then new questions could be filtered using this upon demand, or everyone could see the ones already upvoted by someone whose reputation is at least 10% of his own reputation.
12
-
2Why not age? Country? Gender? Favorite coffee? They all might have effect on others when trying to decide "upvote or not?"– Shadow WizardCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:03
-
5@ShadowWizard Yes, I like the coffee idea. If I see that someone drinks coffee instead of tea then I don't want to hear what they have to say about anything.– JonWCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:04
-
@JonW haha, and to make it happen, there should be a dialog when upvoting asking for those things.– Shadow WizardCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:04
-
Tea drinking people are so unreliable ;) @JonW– Patrick HofmanCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:04
-
1@Pat i.sstatic.net/Te3HR.jpg :D– Shadow WizardCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:07
-
Among other issues raised this might reveal the voter and that would sacrifice that voting is anonymous.– rene ModCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:16
-
1No matter how you round it, all of Jon Skeet's votes on SO could be traced back to him.– Robert LongsonCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:53
-
@rene: This could be avoided in the way I have indicated.– domotorpCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:53
-
@Shadow: You can laugh, but I would be interested in a lot more info about upvoters. These are problematic to obtain, reputation is easily doable.– domotorpCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:54
-
And why is that interesting, for you or for others? What aspect of the site and/or behavior of users will be influenced by this statistic?– rene ModCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:57
-
@rene: I would like to look through questions that other experts find interesting instead of wasting my time on trying to understand uninteresting problems. As it is now, I can only read a random subset of all questions, usually the ones with high votecount, but this is not always a good measure.– domotorpCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 12:00
-
Or maybe this one– rene ModCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 12:17
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
I don't know how the reputation of the upvoter (or downvoter) is related to the usefulness of the post. If Jon Skeet upvotes an question, does that mean the question is better than when I did?
Therefore I don't think this feature is useful. It will add unnecessary weight to the opinion of one of the voters.
answered Apr 15, 2015 at 10:58
-
I really don't understand what your problem is. Beginners might find a question interesting, that is not so for experts.– domotorpCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 11:58
-
2@domotorp Someone with 15 rep upvoting a question might be an expert in the field. Rep doesn't correlate at all with programming experience.– ServyCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 12:59
-
The same argument should hold for the reputation of the person asking the question - then why is that shown? In fact, why do we have reputation at all with this logic?– domotorpCommented Apr 15, 2015 at 19:44
-
@domotorp: That is the gaming element, and the reputation shown in just to reflect that. Nothing more, nothing less. Commented Apr 16, 2015 at 11:08
This would openly and blatantly violate privacy through a multitude of statistical inference algorithms. I would very much like to add the beverage question:
- Coffee
- Tea
- Maté
- Beer
- Wine
- Vodka
- Rum
- Other (please specify)
However, you can't prevent VUI (Voting Under Influence) in this manner.
answered Apr 15, 2015 at 12:34
A new method, to see which one is interesting, could be to display the reputation of the person who upvoted
But surely the title, tags, topic, and question itself is what makes a question interesting?
A user's rep doesn't really have any bearing on whether they are interesting, vote on interesting questions, or have even voted in the same way for the same reasons you do.
and has the largest reputation among upvoters
Wouldn't this alienate low rep users in some way?
Is a person not interesting because they have a low rep on a certain Stack site?
Also, wouldn't we need to consider their rep on other similar sites?
For example, if a user has 150 rep on Programmers site, doesn't it have some bearing they have 50,000 on both Stack Overflow and Code Review?
Then new questions could be filtered using this upon demand
Rep does not equate to anything useful. A user with many poor questions/answers, and has nothing particularly interesting or useful to add to posts, might have a lot of rep they've accumulated over time over many posts.
And a low rep user (say 300) could be a developer for NASA/Google/etc and just joined the site.
And this won't always be users with 300K rep which might interest you, as often average or even low rep users will be the highest rep user who voted.
For the most part, you'd just see result like 1,523, 8,295, 457, 289, 18,443, etc.
Why is that useful, interesting, worth sorting result by, or good for anything really?
It's meaningless.
And users with higher rep are more likely to vote on interesting and decent questions and answers, which means you can already find them from higher voted questions/answers and the more interesting titles and questions.
(Note, I said more likely, not "always").
or everyone could see the ones already upvoted by someone whose reputation is at least 10% of his own reputation.
I really do not know what benefit you expect from this "restriction".
Take my SO rep, 1.8K.
Why do I only want to see rep from users who upvoted who have 180 rep or above?
And is my vote not interesting or is it meaningless to all users above 18K rep?
What about users with say 30K rep. Why do they only want to see rep from users upvoting who have 3K rep or above?
I just don't see any reason why a user's rep would ever be of any interest within the scope of voting.
Knowing who voted would be interesting, but that will never happen (and I agree it shouldn't).
