2001.07.30@*
01:01:19: kaatunut: EDEV: I've asked this before and I'll ask it again; if it's at all feasible, please give us access to text file containing list of all node names. do it together with database backup, for example.
01:02:52: kaatunut: EDEV: potential uses: offline browsing for interesting-looking names, hardlink helper to autonodes, user-side node search with *regexp* without strain to E2.com.
01:41:30: uncleozzy: EDEV: (newbie question ahead): would it be possible to fix the duplicate writeup upon submission problem by putting a condition on the table that checks to see if there's already a node with same author_user and loc_location as the one being inserted?
03:22:57: nate: EDEV: (uncleozzy) no loc_location in 0.8-land, that came in at 0.9. parent_e2node is equivalent -- and it's writeup maintainence create which should take care of that. line 20. why doesn't that work?
03:33:27: uncleozzy: EDEV: (nate) looks like it ought to work, unless the new wu (copy 1) hasn't made into the group yet -- maybe the INSERT is still waiting to run ... we're talking maybe a 1 or 2ms hiccup.
03:52:08: uncleozzy: EDEV: so how about this: create a UNIQUE KEY (title, type_nodetype, author_user) on node? that ought to make mysql balk if a user tries to own more than one node of a type with the same title. i think.
10:13:38: bol: EDEV: Just a thought - now that we have multiple cools, whenever a good w/u appears, it will dominate the Cool User Picks for ages. How's about changing CUP so that it only displays w/u's cooled for the first time?
10:15:19: bol: EDEV: Oh, and while the whole cool system is being overhauled, can we start identifying nodes which have been editor cooled?
10:15:54: Gritchka: EDEV: But as C! now confers no significant direct bonus to the noder, the only point of it is to put it on the front page to gain votes.
10:19:36: bol: EDEV: Maybe it's beneficial to the writer, but what user wants to have 8 links to the same thing on the front page? Allowing multiple instances of the same w/u in CUP totally devalues CUP for the user.
10:20:06: JerboaKolinowski: ONO: EDEV: It conveys 6*1vote (given 1 vote=0.5XP I think this is still significant. But I agree it's deflating for a new level 4 user like evilrooster. The exposure is what's reallyimportant, of course.
10:21:10: bol: EDEV: Perhaps a compromise would be to only allow w/u's to appear once at any given time in CUP. Also - the way the Top 25 nodes is constructed in the email is going to have to be reconsidered.
10:23:15: Gritchka: EDEV: Sorry, I hadn't realized we have wu's twice on the front page at the same time: yes, that should be filtered out. Subsequent C!s should put it back tehre if it's not already there.
10:26:43: JerboaKolinowski: ONO: EDEV: I think bol's right, and that the system should ensure that, say, 10 C!'s have passed before a re-C!'d writup can appear on the front page - you could C! it, but it wouldn't re-enter the list..
10:27:44: Gritchka: ONO: EDEV: Or it just moves it up to the highest position (as if it had been newly C!ed) and clears out the lower copy.
10:33:56: JerboaKolinowski: ONO: EDEV: does anyone else feel that the reduction in XP gained from a C! is grating? I've had a lengthy discussion with evilrooster about this, and what came out was that the 'encouragement effect' of C!ing on newbie noders is diminished. I'm
10:35:58: JerboaKolinowski: ONO: EDEV: wondering whether a formula such as '(11 - level) but at least 3' might be better. This would still be a considerable newbie carrot, but have whatever advantages the new XP-gain amount does for seasoned users.
10:41:30: Gritchka: EDEV: The overwhelmingly biggest way to get XP now is to use up votes. This can't be right. People should be rewarded most for good nodes, and the old C! did that. Now it's just an annexe to New Writeups.
10:46:56: bol: ONO: EDEV: Ah, I misread the front page. I thought it was +3xp per ching, excluding the first one, which I assumed to be still +10. Yeah, I do think that's a bit silly, especially for new users who really need XP
10:49:16: JerboaKolinowski: ONO: EDEV: Hey, now *that*s a good idea bol - 10 for an initial C!, 3 for a re-C!. That has to have something going for it!
10:54:59: Gritchka: ONO: EDEV: But why did the abusers of the C! system do it? To give 10 XP, or to make things visible? We need to curb the abuse but retain the power to genuinely reward.
11:00:12: bol: ONO: EDEV: Any C! system, whatever it is, has to do two things : reward good noding, and point other users in the direction of good nodes. Details can be figured out, but unless it does those two things, the system is broken
11:04:20: JerboaKolinowski: ONO: EDEV: again I think bol is right. My point is the amount of *hard work* extractable from a newbie by the magic 10XP is not to be underestimated. That hard work benefits us all. Will 3XP get the same? I don't think it will.
13:27:43: donfreenut: EDEV: How long before # of C!s shows up in Everything User Search?
13:35:42: mblase: EDEV: I *still* think that making Page of Cool a level power in addition to an editor power would be an excellent motivator.
14:23:14: Codger: EDEV: is # of cools really that necessary? Or am I much too late for the debate?
14:26:27: Codger: EDEV: Or at least let me turn off this xC! stuff and go back to "classic" cool mode in my user preferences. Please.
14:29:29: bol: EDEV: I'm going to add another angle to the C! debate (which is getting boring already). Number of votes is hidden. Number of cool is visible. Just curious what the logic behind that is.
14:33:10: bol: ONO: EDEV: Another thought - what about tweaking the system so that "re-cooling" writeups is a level power. (Sorry, a lot of my work is requirements definition - I annoy people like this for a living)
14:45:22: Chris-O: ONO: EDEV: now, if something gets multicooled and 7
14:48:24: Chris-O: ONO: EDEV: erf. if it's between 7 and 11, does it show up twice in Cream?
16:47:18: mblase: EDEV: bol: logically you can visit the Cool Archive to see if it's been C!ed at least once. C!s are already public.
17:54:21: Amoeba Protozoa: EDEV: I don't know why...but I like a single cool per writeup better.
18:04:16: mblase: EDEV: I agree; multiple cools just "feels" wrong somehow. Perhaps it's the idea of six people cooling a writeup at once that bugs me.
18:11:25: proj2501: EDEV: can someone point me to how e2 does different character sets?
18:16:26: nate: EDEV: a moratorium on "c!-stacking" opinions for a little while, please. I would like to see how the data looks after a few days before making a decision on whether to keep it.
19:00:23: m_turner: EDEV: alas - the 'XP from C!' for nodetrackers will be... confuzled to say the least. (It will be intresting to see how things change) May I ask how soon the xml user search will be modified to reflect this?
19:03:01: m_turner: EDEV: on a related note, would it be a reasnable time to re-approach the question of format for the XML user search? Instead of each node being a single tag, several nested tags. Should allow for more scalibility with additions to the node structure.
19:06:17: m_turner: EDEV: have you considered something like: {node} {parent}111{/parent} {wu}112{/wu} {title}Foo{/title} {cool}nate{/cool} {cool}edb{/cool} etc... {/node}
19:57:31: BlakJak: ONO: EDEV: Sorry to flog a dead horse, so to speak, but for a lvl 1 noder, getting a C! is about the biggest thrill there is. I'm sad to see that go.
19:57:57: BlakJak: ONO: EDEV: Sorry to flog a dead horse, so to speak, but for a lvl 1 noder, getting a C! is about the biggest thrill there is. I'm sad to see that go.
20:00:42: BlakJak: ONO: EDEV: Er, apologies for the duped msg. Don't know how that happened.
20:05:55: sleeping wolf: ONO: EDEV: Hmm, the third writeup in It can't rain all the time. is rather intriguing.
20:09:10: BlakJak: ONO: EDEV: (can't rain) Er... ack? That can't be good
previous day | next day
full month | entire archive