Change log for 1.12

@jxh2154: > albert said: I'll revert the change. But I...

2008-01-14T13:15:57-05:00

albert said: I'll revert the change. But I still want the votes to be weighted when voting from the moderation interface to make it easier to bury bad stuff.

Ah I figured that was the intention (burying the bad from the queue). I see what you're going for there, especially since you added the (down) option in the queue.

Anyway, thanks.

@スラッシュ: Maybe you could allow mods to vote multiple times?

2008-01-14T13:06:30-05:00

Maybe you could allow mods to vote multiple times?

@albert: I'll revert the change. But I still want the...

2008-01-14T13:03:25-05:00

I'll revert the change. But I still want the votes to be weighted when voting from the moderation interface to make it easier to bury bad stuff.

@jxh2154: Not to disagree with Albert again (I'm not...

2008-01-14T12:21:07-05:00

Not to disagree with Albert again (I'm not *trying* to be contrarian, and I *do* like most of the changes you make, really!) but yes, I agree with you that 5 is excessive, and I'm saying that as a mod. I was concerned about this when I saw it.

I understand the utility it has in, say, burying posts against the rules or voting up something unfairly voted down, but that's not so easily determined anyway. And it could be made a separate function other than normal voting if if was seen as desirable.

But my problem is that while before voting was just something I could do offhand with a mere 2 second thought of "I like" or "I dislike", now, as a mod, it feels like I'm bringing the hammer of the gods down upon the image... or alternately, getting down and making love to it. =P A bit extreme in the language I suppose, but 5 points says a hell of a lot when probably 85% of the images on the site are between 4 and -4.

Like wanchan, I'm almost afraid to vote for images now. Oh sure, I know my taste is utterly impeccable and perfect and everyone should be like me (ok, ok, kidding!), but I don't want to disproportionately impose my opinion on an image.

So, albert, I think 5 is just too much. I don't completely reject the notion of weighing moderator votes (but I don't see it as completely necessary either), but if we did it I wouldn't put it at more than 2. And I'd make it favorite = 2, not vote = 2. But again, that's just my opinion. I'm interested to hear what others think.

Although, cmon, that post totally deserves the -54. What were you thinking, 葉月? =P

@piespy: From the comments to post #181643 it seems that...

2008-01-14T12:07:39-05:00

From the comments to post #181643 it seems that moderators now get 5 votes for each post. Was that change intentional?

It makes the list of popular posts much less interesting because it's mostly going to have the mod favorites on it. If I want to see mod favorites, I could just open their favorites list though.

I always liked the list of popular posts because I often found great images that I overlooked otherwise. But I fear the lists might become a little one-sided now.

@Sunfox: > jxh2154 said: > He means in the mod...

2008-01-12T16:59:37-05:00

jxh2154 said:
He means in the mod queue.

Oops. Sorry about that. Just ignore what I said then.

@jxh2154: > Sunfox said: That does sound interesting. I'd...

2008-01-12T14:38:36-05:00

Sunfox said: That does sound interesting. I'd go for it.

He means in the mod queue.

@Sunfox: > LaC said: > The background color of the row...

2008-01-12T13:59:20-05:00

LaC said:
The background color of the row could change gradually with the score.

That does sound interesting. I'd go for it.

@jxh2154: > LaC said:The background color of the row...

2008-01-12T13:55:55-05:00

LaC said:The background color of the row could change gradually with the score.

That would be interesting.

Oh also, albert, thanks for making the whole row clickable, rather than just the checkbox. Sounds like a little thing but it's hugely convenient.

@LaC: The background color of the row could change...

2008-01-12T13:52:40-05:00

The background color of the row could change gradually with the score.

@jxh2154: > albert said: I've restored the ordering by...

2008-01-12T13:49:33-05:00

albert said: I've restored the ordering by date.

Would it be possible to offer a choice (toggled up top) of both or would that be kind of a drain on resources? I wouldn't use by score too much but others might.

@albert: I've restored the ordering by date.

2008-01-12T12:22:43-05:00

I've restored the ordering by date.

@jxh2154: As wanchan said, always parent the best. ...

2008-01-12T12:06:07-05:00

As wanchan said, always parent the best. Sometimes this is subjective (is a large original scan with magazine text better than a clean scan at half the size?) but that's why we parent instead of delete.

@jxh2154: > albert said: How about some sort of highlight...

2008-01-12T12:05:06-05:00

albert said: How about some sort of highlight showing which posts are new to you?

That could work, though it still means skimming the whole list every time I come in. This is only a problem when it's really been hit hard by uploads though, so maybe highlighting will be enough.

@wanchan: My understanding is to parent the best one. It...

2008-01-12T10:06:23-05:00

My understanding is to parent the best one. It is annoying when going through the moderation to find a child post and think "I probably don't need to approve this one as it is a LQ dupe" then check and fine that it is actually better.

@FeKa: > albert said: > How about some sort of...

2008-01-12T08:12:19-05:00

albert said:
How about some sort of highlight showing which posts are new to you?

That sounds good. And I too like the child post thing.
Just a quick question:
who's the parent one? the old pic with low quality or the new pic with best quality?

@albert: > jxh2154 said: > This is interesting, and I...

2008-01-12T08:03:45-05:00

jxh2154 said:
This is interesting, and I see some good in it. However, there were benefits to having it sorted by date. I could know for sure that beyond a certain point, everything was stuff I'd passed over. Now that's going to jump all around as scores change. Could actually result in me missing more, not less. I liked knowing "ok, I need to start looking from *this* image upwards.

How about some sort of highlight showing which posts are new to you?

@jxh2154: > bigrich said:Looks like child posts have...

2008-01-11T21:36:19-05:00

bigrich said:Looks like child posts have yellow borders now?

They do, yay. This is one thing I've wanted to see, and is quite welcome.

@bigrich: Looks like child posts have yellow borders now?

2008-01-11T21:11:47-05:00

Looks like child posts have yellow borders now?

@jxh2154: > albert said: Posts in the moderation...

2008-01-11T21:10:15-05:00

albert said: Posts in the moderation interface are now sorted by score. This means if a pending post gets a lot of votes it has a better chance of not being overlooked.

This is interesting, and I see some good in it. However, there were benefits to having it sorted by date. I could know for sure that beyond a certain point, everything was stuff I'd passed over. Now that's going to jump all around as scores change. Could actually result in me missing more, not less. I liked knowing "ok, I need to start looking from *this* image upwards.

I'm contemplating purging all the deleted posts and allowing users to reupload stuff to use this system from the start.

All? Doubt too many that didn't get approved would get approved in a second round, but I also doubt we'll see too many people reuploading things. At least I hope not. Don't know if it's a good idea though.