Re: Voting [was: Passing UMOs]

["Alexey Parshin" <alexeyp@gmail.com>]

Alexey Parshin wrote:
> IMHO, only one version of the UMO should be available at the time.
What would be the point of versioning then?

The point of versioning is to allow the UMO creating and modification support, and the ability to switch between versions. However, from the point of the author, there is only one current version of UMO that author considers necessary to study. Otherwise, there is no point to create a new version if people can still use the old one.

> Otherwise, it's chaos. The voting should belong to UMO itself and not
> to a particular version.
This is certainly simplest solution, but doesn't allow authors to judge
effect of
changes they make too well.

If an author is really interested to see the difference - then he can simply see the difference between old rating (before new version) and after. For instance, the rating was 4.5 and became 4.7 with the new version.. After all, people who passed that UMO can't vote for another version because it requires 'em to pass that version again. BTW, this also means that students can only pass the UMO once regardless of version..

> Otherwise, the voting that doesn't affect anything in UU therefore
> isn't too important - requires too much attention from people. Did I
> already vote for version XYZ? May be not? Let's try to vote.. Oh, it
> says I did it already..
Making it easy in interface is important, you are definitely right, but
I don't see how
is the problem you describe different whether we have single counter or
per-version
counter...

>
> 2007/1/4, sergey@total-knowledge.com
> <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com> < sergey@total-knowledge.com
> <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com>>:
>
>     Yes, but imho it's something we can compromise. I don't think it's
>     going
>     to be any significant amount of "returning customers" for the same
>     UMO.
>     On the other hand...
>     Qualified users will see a "Vote" link that invites them to vote
>     for this
>     UMO. Returning users will probably see something like "You already
>     voted"
>     message. If they return to the new version of the UMO and they
>     submitted
>     their vote for any previous version of it, they may be invited to
>     revote
>     again. I think it's not going to be hard to check if returning
>     user _that_
>     _voted_ looks at newer version of the object and update his vote if he
>     decides to revote.
>
>
>     > That would mean users that voted on version X wouldn't be able to
>     > vote on version Y.
>     >
>     > sergey@total-knowledge.com <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com>
>     wrote:
>     >> I was thinking of having the same usage and vote count for the new
>     >> version
>     >> as for previous version. If we implement it this way, authors
>     will see
>     >> the
>     >> difference which their recent versioned change made to the UMO by
>     >> comparing usage and voting of both versions from the date new
>     version
>     >> was
>     >> created. And we'll avoid the problem that you mentioned regarding
>     >> discouraging authors from creating new versions
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>> If we have separate counters for different versions, we'll have
>     >>> new versions will have vote count of zero, which will discourage
>     >>> authors from creating new versions.
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> sergey@total-knowledge.com <mailto: sergey@total-knowledge.com>
>     wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>>> let's keep voting discussion in a separate thread.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> sergey@total-knowledge.com
>     <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com> wrote:
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>> Another thing regarding voting that imho may be important.
>     >>>>>> UU may have different versions of the same UMO available for
>     >>>>>> studying.
>     >>>>>> Are
>     >>>>>> we taking into consideration an UMO version when counting user
>     >>>>>> votes?
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>> Good question. I was thinking about that for a while, and
>     didn't come
>     >>>>> to any conclusion.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>
>     >>>> Imho we should have separate "use counters" that you
>     mentioned in your
>     >>>> response and student votings for each UMO version.
>     >>>> Any versioned change to the object may change votings and usage
>     >>>> significantly. If we keep track of it in the UU, it will help
>     authors
>     >>>> with
>     >>>> the improvements of their UMOs and students with better
>     selection of
>     >>>> objects from Repository.
>     >>>>
>     >>>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
>     >>> Total Knowledge. CTO
>     >>> http://www.total-knowledge.com <http://www.total-knowledge.com>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
>     > --
>     > Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
>     > Total Knowledge. CTO
>     > http://www.total-knowledge.com <http://www.total-knowledge.com>
>     >
>     >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Parshin,
> http://www.sptk.net

--
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
Total Knowledge. CTO
http://www.total-knowledge.com

-- 
Alexey Parshin,
http://www.sptk.net