Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • 1. Patches welcome. :-) There's a todo list [perl.org].

    2. The "was this helpful?" feature would solve some of these issues, I think.

    3. It was a concious choice not to allow comments on reviews. I didn't and don't want it to turn into a discussion forum. I understand the problem of it going that way anyway sometimes, but I'd rather not encourage it.

      - ask

    --

    -- ask bjoern hansen [askbjoernhansen.com], !try; do();

    • Hey, thanks for dropping by. :) I’ll see about how to be more useful (and where I can squeeze this into my crowded headspace (finding time is not really an issue)). As I said, mostly I wanted to stir up some talk, because I can see this issues but I’m not bright enough to have solutions.

      I suppose “was this helpful?” is already on the todo list as “Helpfulness ratings”? That sounds like a good idea, yes. I thought of a meta/moderation system, but I’m unsure if the place gets enough traffic to sustain such. OTOH it can’t hurt in any case. I was pretty sure comments were consciously decided against, and I agree that it is the right choice in this case. I’m just wondering what could possibly be done in order to keep “discussion ratings” out of the place, because goodness knows it is ill-suited and ill-chosen for that purpose.

      After some thinking, how about the following suggestions?

      1. The “add review” link would be removed and only the distro page on search.cpan.org would have a link for writing reviews. You can still write a review from the ratings page, but it would take a roundtrip through the distro page. The intent is to associate writing a review with the distribution rather than with the ratings, and to discourage the reflex to “reply” to a rating.

      2. There would be some kind of “respond” link which either sends mail to the rating author or leaves a private message to him somewhere in the system (the latter option requires extra infrastructure of course).

      The idea is that moving these links around this way would act as “syntactic salt” for doing the wrong thing, while funnelling people towards other venues. How do these sound?