[pmwiki-users] Rating cookbooks

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 01:50:06PM +1300, John Rankin wrote:
> >   !! Supporters
> >
> >   * [[~Pm]] +1
> >     I support this recipe because it's well written and
> >     the author bribed me to say this.
> >   * [[~John]] +1
> >     Great recipe.
> >   * [[~Sally]] +1
> >   * Bob +1
> >     I don't have/want a profile page, but I support this
> >recipe.
> [...]
> If it's included now, why a "+" prefix rather than just 1? 
> Alternatively, why +1 rather than + on its own?

In many other projects that I work on, "+1" is used to mean
"plus one supporter" or "me too".  It's +1 in the sense of
"add my supporting vote" as opposed to "I give this a rating of 1".

+2 then means "That goes double for me."  -1 is "I'm against
this."


> Perhaps the best argument for *not* including a +1 is that it
> then means if it's introduced later, people can have an option
> to leave a comment, but not a rating.  I don't think supporters 
> should be forced to rate a recipe. If +1 means "I have not
> given this recipe a rating", the only reason to have it now is
> to create a unique markup expression.

Again, +1 doesn't indicate rating, it simply indicates "I support
the recipe".  Because of allof the confusion/angst regarding
"what does a rating mean", I'm completely ignoring the notion of
"rating" recipes for now.

> Should anonymous supporters be accepted?

I think the answer is ultimately yes.  We might require that
everyone supply an author name, but since we don't have any
way to authenticate the author name it's effectively anonymous
anyway.

Pm