User rating and comment

[Satchman]

<quote user="drsumit">
I am also wary of the fact that while selecting good site I can rate this site poor

http://prntscr.com/3i5cpr

which is a paradox. IMO once we drag the slider to poor the option of selecting good site etc
should not be possible. Again when dragging the slider to excellent there should be some
restriction of categories.

How about this - http://prntscr.com/3i5e7y
[/quote]

I TOTALLY AGREE with this!

Satch

[drsumit]

<quote user="satchman">
I TOTALLY AGREE with this!

Satch
[/quote]

Thanks satch

I really would like to see the ratings change for the better

[c۞g]

I just realized
When displaying users rating masked as "I do not" trust.
If the scorecard is red and has 1 reliable user with a comment displaying "I do not trust"
while the scorecard may have a dozen "I trust" micro-worker or unreliable (new user) comments.
The person who made the mistake of commenting and rating red is to be at blame for the site's reputation although there may be a dozen users who rated poorly and did not leave a comment.

This results in unfair "finger pointing"
People need to understand that WOT is a Meritocracy and comments are not ratings, nor should they stand out as if they were.

[drsumit]

<quote user="c۞g">
I just realized
When displaying users rating masked as "I do not" trust.
If the scorecard is red and has 1 reliable user with a comment displaying "I do not trust"
while the scorecard may have a dozen "I trust" micro-worker or unreliable (new user) comments.
The person who made the mistake of commenting and rating red is to be at blame for the site's reputation although there may be a dozen users who rated poorly and did not leave a comment.

This results in unfair "finger pointing"
People need to understand that WOT is a Meritocracy and comments are not ratings, nor should they stand out as if they were.
[/quote]

This has been a problem right from day 1. Siteowners assume that the one person who have rated and commented with negative categories is responsible for their site's poor rating and not looking at other reviewers who have rated without commenting because of obvious reasons - those reviewers are anonymous.

[rmn]

@evilfantasy:
I'd feel fine if the comments would be private. As I'm (mostly) using it for making notes for myself. In my opinion users are mostly not interessed in technical details and I don't like it too much to argue with someone when nothing has changed. Most often it took a lot of time to get a qualified comment just for my memory.

[rmn]

@drsumit
I agree with you, cause if a comment fits I dont set another one and just give a "agree" on the other comment.

[rmn]

@Timo

My personal wishlist would be to have 2 separated comment fields:
1) a common/public comment field (status quo now)
2) a personal note field with the capability to store more information, not visible to the public.
Added functionality:
- tagging with a timestamp
- a slider to choose for whom I would allow/share the information with (meant as from wich level on -> bronze, silver....etc)
- changes on the notes field would not chage the "first seen" date on the public field.

This would make it possible to review a site and mark it green and undo "red comments", but keeping in mind there has been something in the past without an effect on the status. A nice idea would be to have a general "share level" on the personal settings page.

[Timo]

We published feature that shows user ratings on scorecard.

Remember that you can opt out from this at any time. Just go to profile page http://www.mywot.com/user-profile

[Kraftwerk]

I think that's a good implementation. We had some scammers here before who claimed to be scam busters, but rated sites good. Wouldn't work now anymore
Looks good

[drsumit]

Timo - I don't trust has become I dont't trust - kindly rectify it