OzBargain Update 21 May 2007 - Negative Voting

scotty on 21/05/2007 - 22:39

I have just updated OzBargain with some new code. You will notice that the voting widget has changed. Instead of displaying merely number of votes a deal has got, it now shows:

  1. Number of positive votes
  2. Number of negative votes
  3. Percentage of positive votes

I have added a feature to let users cast negative vote on a deal. Ever wanting to mark a deal as "dodgy"? Now you can!

For now, in order to get onto the front page, you need to have:

  1. At least 2 positive votes
  2. Number of positive votes must be equal to or greater than the number of negative votes.

Again, you can see everyone who has voted a specific deal when you access the "votes" page — this is to hold everyone accountable.

Also, you cannot cast a negative vote if your account is less than 30 days old. I think voting something as "spam" or "dodgy" should be reserved to our regular visitors.

Any comment?

Site Discussion

Comments

  • JeffreyM on 22/05/2007 - 07:49

    Don't like the idea of negative voting, I think it only should be positive voting, the same people might vote negivate votes for the same people?

    • scotty on 22/05/2007 - 09:45

      I understand that there will be some social implications with regarding to negative voting. I do expect votes to be positive most of the time, but negative voting is a mean for people to report "bad content" — an unfortunate necessity with these user-generated deals.

      We have some issues with spams and viral marketing here, and it took me time to spot them and bring them back to the moderation queue. As this site gets more popular, it is just going to be easier for spams to creep in.

      I also feel that this new implementation is not ideal — you'll see the percentage to be 100% most of the time, which makes it sort of redundant. I am happy to take any suggestion.

  • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2007 - 10:06

    Like JefferyM I think this could have implications BUT that said I think we should try it.

    The majority here are trying to help share in a positive way the bargains they have found. Hey much of the fun is finding the deals as much as utilising them.

    Spamming is not within the spirit of this site and if this stops that then its a good thing.

    If the above doesn't work, then a modification (off the top of my head) could be that 2 negatives = 1 positive.

    If it really is spam it will get a lot of negative votes by all, where positive votes seem only to be awarded if it is directly of benefit to the voter.

  • neil on 22/05/2007 - 13:02

    Thanks for the negative button. Spammers beware.

  • John on 22/05/2007 - 15:17

    Thanks Scotty for the update. I guess the negative voting would be good if there's an offer that is not actually a bargain (ie. more expensive than the current retail price). And again, reducing spammers.

    Although it is unlikely for someone to vote negative but atleast now we have an option to spot dodgy deals.

  • cacbm on 22/05/2007 - 16:49

    I don't think it's a direct result of the new functions implemented, and contrary to what you said earlier that May is a quiet month, there have been a flood of fresh bargains appearing the last couple of day. Great work people!

  • Steve on 23/05/2007 - 17:28

    I agree with John's comment, a good way to eliminate (or at least reduce) the posting of bargains that aren't really bargains.

    On the positive voting front, maybe on posting a bargain the vote count should automatically be +1 so the poster doesn't have to vote for his own bargain, as I think this feels a bit unnecessary? Or, prevent the poster from voting, but that would mean reducing the threshold to get on the front page?

    • scotty on 23/05/2007 - 17:37

      <blockquote>On the positive voting front, maybe on posting a bargain the vote count should automatically be +1 so the poster doesn't have to vote for his own bargain.</blockquote>

      Done :)

      Also 3 positive votes are required now. Welcome back from the holidays? :)

      • Steve on 23/05/2007 - 17:52

        Thanks scotty, good to be back, sort of.

  • [Deactivated] on 24/09/2007 - 11:33

    Scotty

    As a refinement, could you consider the following.

    A negative vote to require a comment - yes I know some may put nothing, but at least it should provide us with a reason why they voted negative (rather than just not voting if they dont think it's a bargain).

    I saw one recently that had a negative vote and I wondered why this was the case. - did they just press the wrong button, and I also thought they may have had some further insight, like the vendor is unreliable. Obviously you should have right the edit these so no apparent slander is created, just as you can with any comment.

    That way we can judge for ourselves the degree the negative comment affects our assessment of the deal.

    Cheers

    • scotty on 25/09/2007 - 10:03

      Yes allowing an optional 1-line comment on negative vote might be a good idea. It can even be selecting from a list of canned options so it won't be too much work for the end users. For example,

      • Spam
      • Cheaper elsewhere
      • Too much T&C

      etc.

      • [Deactivated] on 25/09/2007 - 12:14

        That sounds good - so knuckle down with the programming manual —- lol

  • [Deactivated] on 26/09/2007 - 16:11

    Scotty - Another point on the negative voting, is to prompt the person if they really want to do that. On one of my deals dansor says he didn't mean to do it, but he cant reverse it. so its too easy to make a mistake

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join