|
|
Posted by Marek Zawadzki on 11/01/06 00:11
Moot wrote:
> Marek Zawadzki wrote:
[...]
>> - Some weird JavaScript setup that requires you to leave the site open
>> for a while for the vote to become active? (nah)
>
> And what happens when they have javascript disabled?
(thanks for your insights)
OK, let's assume JS has to be enabled for the website to work correctly.
[...]
> Off the top of my head, how about a two-fold system where votes can be
> cast by both registered and anonymous users. Where registered users
> can vote once, and are counted as a full vote, but anonymous votes are
> counted at some % of a full vote, maybe half, maybe 2/3, or whatever
> works for you. You could also tie that in with the IP address by
> counting successive votes from the same IP to be worth less and less.
>
> That way, someone trying to skew the results by voting multiple times
> finds his votes being worth less and less as he votes more.
But this doesn't solve the problem of people behind NATs (I guess I
could for example disable some large offices from voting this way?).
> But...I digress. This isn't a national election or anything, so does
> it really matter if the results are skewed a bit? Is the benefit worth
> the effort?
I think it is, because if even at digg.com only a few dozens of votes
really make a difference to the order of topics then it doesn't take too
much for one person to completely change what appears and where on the
website.
I just believe people (including me) are generally averse to giving
away their info, creating accounts and even clicking something if they
don't have to. And I still would like to get some output from them ;-)
-marek
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|