h a l f b a k e r yYou want a piece of this?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
It occurs to me that instead of a
consecutive series of annotations, and a
relatively unconnected and anonymised
arrangement of optional voting, it might
be interesting to have one of three types
of input area (think of it as if you're
entering your annotation into one of three
'columns',
notionally). One column would
be 'Pros', one would be neutral comments,
and one would be 'Cons'.
Thus, people can write a one-liner
bulletpoint (whether it actually has a bullet
is immaterial) that points out a deficiency
/ weakness in the idea, or an advantage /
strength, or simply a neutral comment
(including praise or otherwise, but more
general rather than pointing out any
specific aspect).
These three columns can be responded to,
but the 'main' entries tally up and appear
as the vote, also.
A website that agrees
http://ideastockexchange.com/af9.htm
We need one place for each idea [myclob, Dec 08 2006]
Another Link to this idea
http://groups-beta....ock-Exchange/topics
Google Group for this idea [myclob, Dec 08 2006]
Article on decision-making
http://www.guardian.../0,,1711859,00.html
[imaginality, Dec 08 2006]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., http://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
I'm always skeptical of anything that smacks of us telling Jutta how she should run her site. |
|
| |
That said, can we set it up so if enough people flag a given comment, it gets a TROLL prefix? |
|
| |
Well, I certainly don't expect suggestions
to be acted upon, but I don't mind putting
the idea forward anyway even if it comes
to nothing. Even if it's only destined for
the hypothetical halfbakery, not the real
one. |
|
| |
Pro: It will reduce the price of custard by 0.0001 percent. Con: Unspeakable destruction of humanity, the Earth as we know it, and all things cherished by humankind. Score: +1 / -1. |
|
| |
Don't worry, I'm not going to get all huffy at this one. "How do you translate a rational argument into a web forum?" is of much interest to me in general, even if I might not do it here. |
|
| |
Oh my gosh, oh my gosh, oh my gosh... |
|
| |
That is how everyone makes a complicated or important decision... they list reasons to agree or disagree... |
|
| |
Then if you are a big nerd (like me) you assign scores to each reason, and count up the score... |
|
| |
I want to create a way of doing that online... Were we count the number of pros and cons that agree or disagree with an idea... |
|
| |
I hate the thread-based discusion forum... |
|
| |
Please talk to me... You have got to help me find some computer programer or someone who can help us make this a reality... |
|
| |
[myclob], for the more complicated decisions, there's evidence to suggest it's better not to make the decision by trying to consciously weigh up all the pros and cons, but by deciding more intuitively (see link). |
|
| |
This would put an end to the autobone or at least put a name with that (-) vote. Now with your name attached you would have to post a (.) or small stupid comment in the con side to have any effect on the voteing of somebody's idea. |
|
| |