What other have rated

Guest

What other have rated

Post by Guest » Tue Sep 16, 2008 10:56 am

I'd like to see what others have rated an individual site . . . I can see their comments, which is a good indication, but I'd like to see the actual rating they gave. Sort of like the "My Ratings" page in my own profile, though that's not a specific rating number either, just a listing of the sites rated by me.

Can I do this, and if so, how??

Sorry if this is a dense question. I'm still learning my way around here. Doing a lot of clicking on this and that and seeing what it shows.

lordpake
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:57 pm

I haven't seen anything that

Post by lordpake » Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:04 am

I haven't seen anything that would indicate we can see individual ratings per sites.

I can see one potential benefit in allowing ratings to be seen, this would bring transparency and thus serve the community when members could spot users that deliberately give good ratings/reviews to malicious sites.

However, are there potential downsides?

"Men make good pets."

Guest

My reason for wanting to see

Post by Guest » Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:54 am

My reason for wanting to see what others have rated a site is so that I can see if my rating differs substantially from what more experienced users (such as yourself and logicman for example) have rated.

If so, then that would be a big hint for me to go back and do some better investigating of the site. I may stick to my guns, but at least I would be sure that I had good cause for disagreeing with you guys.

And that would work both ways . . . if I rated green and you rated red, or if I rated red and you rated green.

As far as any downside goes, an experienced users rating might influence a less experienced user to give the same rating WITHOUT doing their own due diligence. As I said, that's not MY reason for wanting the access. I just want to see if I need to go back and do more due diligence.

Sami
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:43 am

Re: What other have rated

Post by Sami » Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:00 pm

Our policy has always been to keep user ratings private. If a user wants to reveal their opinion of a website to others, they have an option to post a comment.

Being able to see how other people have rated a site would certainly improve transparency, but it also has downsides. I'm inclined to believe it's more important to have a secret ballot to make sure nobody feels pressured to rate in a certain way.

Sami
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:43 am

Re: I haven't seen anything that

Post by Sami » Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:06 pm

members could spot users that deliberately give good ratings/reviews to malicious sites

Well, our system already automatically detects these types of malicious users and won't give much weight to their ratings. This is a meritocracy after all.

Guest

OK . . . I see the reasoning

Post by Guest » Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:22 pm

OK . . . I see the reasoning Sami.

But if the system detects users that give good reviews to malicious sites, that must be a heck of an algorithm. I mean it would have to detect that a user gives good ratings to malicious sites REPEATEDLY, not just once. A good rating to a malicious site just once could be a mistake, not a "malicious user".

Granted, giving less weight to a rating like that is appropiate, but judging the user as "malicious" for a single mistake isn't. Clearly, I'm defending noobs like myself here.

Sami
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:43 am

Re: OK . . . I see the reasoning

Post by Sami » Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:03 pm

You're right, it is rather complicated. Nobody will be shunned for an occasional mistake though, so I wouldn't worry about that. :)

logicman
Posts: 378
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:58 am

Due diligence.

Post by logicman » Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:49 pm

BobJam says: "an experienced users rating might influence a less experienced user to give the same rating WITHOUT doing their own due diligence."

I like what you say, BobJam.

In the UK, the laws of evidence have much the same to say about how expert witnesses should not be presented to a jury, in case the jury lets the expert's reputation over-ride the jury's own common sense.

I need to give this a lot more thought before I can offer any reasoned and rational suggestion.


My mission statement:
I will boldly go, where only spammers have gone before.

wehaveitall
Posts: 1097
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:40 am

Have the option of showing your rating without a comment

Post by wehaveitall » Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:47 am

Options options options, I know that's all I seem to suggest, but I think this can help.
When you give a rating, have a little checkbox that says, "Help make wot better and make my rating public" Then in the scorecard, it shows all the people who made their rating public and what they rated it. For the other ratings, you can put private for each person's name, and then put their rating. This can still work with my idea of Website Moderation http://www.mywot.com/en/forum/1443-new-wot-features by not showing who rated it unless chosen public, but still showing the little people icons and what the overall rating is.


Wot rocks

phantazm
Posts: 4906
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:46 pm

Rating, voting, democracy, transparency

Post by phantazm » Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:45 am

Sami: "Being able to see how other people have rated a site would certainly improve transparency, but it also has downsides. I'm inclined to believe it's more important to have a secret ballot to make sure nobody feels pressured to rate in a certain way."

This is a quite tricky question! And I think Samis remark demonstrates this. Even if nobody actually mentioned the word yet, this debates invokes the idea of 'democracy' - and all the problems and principles related to this.

This could be a very long thread, but let us not reduce complicated aspects to simple arguments, even if that's always tempting. First of all, let me remind that 'democracy' is a very old idea, invented thousands of years ago. Nevertheless the wide use of democracy is very recent. Plus the process is far from finished, as many countries still don't use the system. China could be a major example.

The simplest version is something like this: We have a problem, two or more possible solutions. We have to select one of them, therefore we all vote. And majority wins.

The normal version is much more indirect: First everybody vote, not to select a specific solution but a person to represent their principles. These persons then constitute some kind of paliament. And then the proces repeats itself, as members af parliament selects ministers of the actual government. And on top of all this, there's usually a fourth level called president or primeminister...

So, do I need or want to know how 'John Doe' voted? And how he justified his vote? On what level, I'd like to ask? How about secret votings in the parliament? Or in the government? Or the president? I wouldn't accept secret votings on higher levels, because that would mean that laws could be created, decisions made - without anyone being accountable to the public. In the end it's a question of responsibility...

Let's compare two systems: WOT and SiteAdvisor (SA). WOT is still debating these things, while SA defined it finally years ago. I have the same username here and there, but my visibility is quite different. SAs profilepage is minimal: you can add a signature, but that's all. WOTs profilepage reminds me more of Myspace or other online communities. But SAs profilepage at least offers a simple and quick way to see anyones votes and comments, at least the last 500 times. I don't mind being an anonymous entity, considering the many scams and scums out there. But I should still be responsible, accountable. It's a question of balance: my real name is hidden, but my username is always tied to 500 visible recent ratings...

I think I can predict Samis comment already: WOT is not a democracy but a meritocracy. Yes, but that doesn't solve the problem with visibility: a meritocracy does not work unless merits are public, somehow...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests