[Catalog-sig] Please turn off ratings

Michael Foord fuzzyman at gmail.com
Wed Apr 6 19:32:56 CEST 2011


On 6 April 2011 18:24, Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/06/2011 12:52 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
> > On 6 April 2011 17:44, P.J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> >
> >> At 02:13 AM 4/6/2011 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >>
> >>> No, he countered with a community poll that has, as I remember, 100-200
> >>> responders. After a contentious discussion.
> >>>
> >>
> >> A poll which, unfortunately, had numerous choices about what *kind* of
> >> system to have, such that votes *against* Martin's proposal were widely
> >> split, and IIRC, the difference between the number of votes cast for
> >> different alternatives was pretty negligible.
> >>
> >> Looking at the numbers at one point, I concluded that if I had run a
> poll
> >> with those results, I would have had to conclude that there was
> essentially
> >> zero consensus about what direction should be taken, and either tabled
> the
> >> notion or gone back to the list to try to get more specific discussion.
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, the poll was run as a decision-making mechanism, rather
> than
> >> an information-gathering one.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Well sure, but it still didn't show that *nobody* wants ratings which is
> > what people in this thread seem to be claiming.
> >
> > I'm afraid that those in this thread, and with all respect to Jacob those
> > who respond to him on twitter, *do* represent a vocal minority primarily
> of
> > package authors and are not in any way representative of users of pypi. A
> > poll may be flawed however it is done, but is a much better mechanism.
> >
> > Martin *has* offered to do another poll, an offer that has been ignored.
>
> For those who may not be familiar with the prior poll, here are the
> results reported to the list[1]:
>
> - ----------------------------------- %< --------------------------------
> Allow ratings and comments on all packages (status quo) 237
> Allow package owners to disallow comments (ratings unmodified). 139
> Allow comments, but only send them to package owners (ratings
> unmodified).    33
> Disallow comments (ratings unmodified). 24
> Disallow ratings and comments (status three months ago).        88
> - ----------------------------------- %< --------------------------------
>
>

Hmmm... despite claims that this poll was flawed it seems the result is
pretty clear. A *big* majority of users who voted were in favour of ratings
then.

But I guess that is another argument. *sigh*

Michael



> Interpretation of those results was the subject of a huge thread, which
> produced no clear consensus (at least to me).
>
>
> [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.catalog/2169
>
>
> Tres.
> - --
> ===================================================================
> Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
> Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk2cocQACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ5rcQCgqA1G5mw21Zvz++iMM3vc63i0
> McwAoLz3aKjZ5bEg07xAcBwhHC8irMjz
> =caM8
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>



-- 

http://www.voidspace.org.uk/

May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20110406/83b8df41/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Catalog-SIG mailing list