|
|
|
Keisha, I urge you to reconsider your symbolic vote against this.
Consider the case of no one gaming the system. In such a case, the real most popular place would get punished. Since they aren't gaming the system, they won't make any effort to reduce their traffic, or increase it through artificial means. However, their traffic will decline slightly because they are no longer listed in popular places. They will fall slightly in the traffic ratings, and show up on the list again (in the number 2 spot). This natural oscillation of legitimate users will ensure that the most popular places still stay on the popular places list (at least most of the time). It is the legitimate people who do not attempt to manipulate their traffic ratings that will keep this from becoming a "race to 0 traffic". The people gaming the system will constantly be overshooting and undershooting the "sweet spot", while the legitimate popular sites will get a chance to actually be on the popular places list. This system rewards people who aren't gaming the system, and punishes those who do game the system. What more could you want? What more could I want?
1. A complete removal of traffic based scoring and ranking. Number one is possible, numbers two and three are no more than pipe dreams. However, I can honestly say that I see number three happening before number two, depressing isn't it.... You still have the top two gamers of the system leap-frogging each other as one is bumped and the next moves up into it's place with the next 18 slots taken by other gamers of the system who are happy with the time they DO recieve as the top listings and continue to game the system. Out of curiosity, how long does this imposed penalty last? One day, two days, a week or more, or until traffic is calculated next? This is a test to see what it means now that the Lindens claim WEB 382 is "implemented," and that no one can close an issue.
However, anyone can come and declare an issue is FIXED still. This one is an obvious "FIXED" because the Lindens completely removed Popular Places some months ago, so the proposal is entirely moot. Nevertheless, this proposal sat here untouched, because it was made by one of the JIRA regulars and scripters, Gigs Taggart. Those legions of good citizens who always wish to tidy up everybody else's proposal that seems "outdated" or "moot" or "fixed" were strangely absent when it came to this one. It will be interesting to see what happens now. Just as I suspected, the RESOLVED closes the vote. So my decision to RESOLVE Gig's proposal stopped all the voting. I was given a message "you cannot vote on resolved issues" when I attempted to activate the vote. So while CLOSED is not an option, pressing RESOLVED merely accomplishes the same thing – stopping the votes on Gig's issue, likely against his will. Prokofy, your action here of resolving another thread to prove something for your
This type of using jira is hardly acceptable, please create test threads instead in future, thanks. I wonder if "Cannot Reproduce" would be allowed since it is a new feature Xp
well, gonna try setting it like that and see if that makes the "Reopen" link show, if there isn't really a way to get it back, then this is really fucked up ok, yaeh, we need someone to undo this mess caused by Pork
 for those concerned, please consider my "watch" here as a vote for this
(any other watches not explicitly defined by me as votes are to be considered regular watches) edit:btw, how come somthing that is a feature suggestion be fixed? it wasn't broken to start with...the choices of words for stuff on jira is seriously flawed :/ I don't think this issue is particularly relevant anymore, since Popular places is gone.
oh, I see...well, I still like the idea of making the first place of the search results be somthing undesirable as means to deal with gaming of the search ranks... since its your idea, could you create another entry here on pjira about this variation for me to vote for please?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
New Feature
Resolved
Normal
A solution for traffic abuse: Supress the highest popular places listing.
While I don't have a location that is even close to being at risk of being affected by this proposal I do have to express a very strong desire to submit a whole hearted vote against it.
When dealing with computer algorithms, sure, a computer running a defined set of hard rules will experience a cascade effect to a point where this would balance out results, however, we aren't talking about computers in this respect. In an environment where anything can happen, especialy the unpredictability of humanity, this could effectively cascade all the way to disasterous results.