add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I have noticed that some ideas get votes for or against owing to what appears to be a multitude of reasons: the politics of an idea, the vision of an idea, gut instinct aroused by an idea, the practicality of an idea et cetera...
Which scale is acceptable (or not), is not for me to decide or suggest,
but we should, I think, come to some sort of consensus on why ideas are croissant-worthy and fishboneable. I dont really see the point in having a voting scale without defining what is being measured.
[link]
|
| |
A croissant from me indicates that I like an idea, for any one (or more) of a huge number of reasons. I may vote for an idea for precisely the same reason that I vote against another one.
You don't expect to enumerate your reasons for a particular purchase ('Why did you buy *this* cheese? You bought *that* one last week.'), so why do so here? |
|
| |
It's all very un-scientific and I felt the same way as you for a while. My bugbear was that I got few croissants when I posted something practical and workable but more when I posted something that was humourously unworkable or impracticable. |
|
| |
In the end I realised that the voting scale was a measure of the halfbakery itself. All the factors you've listed are relevant but you must also take into account a measure of fit. That which fits in with the style of humour, idea, and thought of the halfbakery is likely to get a croissant (unless it can be humourously fishboned). |
|
| |
In the end it's a self-creating system, with its own internal feedback. Watch it grow. Watch it develop. Weep when your pet idea gets fishboned. In the end accept and admire it for what it is.
((((could you hear the rousing music in that last bit or what?)))) |
|
| |
Croissants and fishbones are all as one. It's being ignored that hurts! |
|
| |
I agree with Rod's to a fair extent, insomuch as I will sometimes vote for or against an idea simply because I have nothing further to add to the comments already there.
Generally, however, I reserve voting (for or against)for genuine ideas on the halfbakery. Discussion entries (such as this one), or ideas about which I have no interest I will leave neutral. I've also stopped voting against obvious trolls, as I feel they are best ignored.
However, everyone's vote is their own. Use it as you see fit. |
|
| |
I think the ambiguity of the vote is one of HB's greatest strengths. |
|
| |
Mine is a combination of waugsqueke and angel. |
|
| |
Anything that involves genetic engineering, exploding, custard, nanites, superheroes, schrodingers anything and lately, bluetooth and farts, gets automatically fishboned. I don't care how fancy an idea is, if it starts off with a totally impossible or overused base, it's boned. Bluetooth, whether or not it ever gets going I'm just sick of hearing about. And the superheroes are just lame. |
|
| |
Anything that involves a variant of 'let the geeks figure it out', or 'Don't ask me how THAT works' gets boned as well. The POINT is to figure out how to work it. Coming up with a reasonable idea of how to do something that just needs a little tweaking or 'I don't know how to get from here to here', I'll try and help. |
|
| |
Anything titled 'A REAL...' is usually boned because it's some off the wall ranting that isn't even close to reality, and usually involves arguing from non-existent authority. "NASA is working on this..."...but nobody's ever heard of it, and their website doesn't mention it. |
|
| |
Any 'wouldn't it be neat if' <I dislike acronyms.> that doesn't include '...and here's a possible way'. |
|
| |
Things blatantly stolen from books or movies and presented as original ideas. |
|
| |
Any idea that ends with 'Discuss'. That is what the Halfbakery is FOR. |
|
| |
Low-budget idea name puns, things that only exist because someone thought of a pun on an existing name and had to make it an idea. |
|
| |
A decent idea, one that might actually be workable, gets a croissant. Amusing if otherwise unworkable ones might. |
|
| |
<Lest you think I'm unutterably negative, this took me 20 minutes or so to write.> |
|
| |
So... you're unutterably negative *and* a slow typer? ;) |
|
| |
My system seems similar to StarChaser's: |
|
| |
Inventions that are possible to implement, and would make the world a better place (however slightly), get croissants. |
|
| |
WIBNIs and inventions that are impossible to implement get fishbones. |
|
| |
Inventions that are blatantly useless or harmful get fishbones. |
|
| |
Things that are not inventions get fishbones. |
|
| |
<Grins and swats PotatoStew> No, just that I kept editing and adding to it. |
|
| |
Interesting/amusing and maybe possible? Croissant. Uninteresting/impossible/viscious/destructive? Fishbone. Everything else: no vote. The whole structure is subjective. Don't try to quantify it, it can't be done, and shouldn't be done anyway. |
|
| |
Spelled correctly, poor grammar: Neutral
Spelled poorly, grammar follows suit: Bones
Spelled correctly, grammar passable: Croissant
|
|
| |
So, sdm. Is it clearer now? |
|
| |
pfft.
No, its not clearer, but it's a good indicator from the HB regulars on what makes a good idea. Yes, the collective unconciousness... |
|
| |
//we should, I think, come to some sort of consensus on why ideas are croissant-worthy and fishboneable// |
|
| |
You’re right and it's been done...it just may not be apparent to you yet. |
|
| |
We may not be able to pinpoint the components of a great Halfbakery idea, and the causal forces which make these ideas great seem to differ depending on who you ask, nevertheless, Halfbakers seem to recognize a great idea when they see one, just check the “best” section for the current greats. |
|
| |
//I dont really see the point in having a voting scale without defining what is being measured// |
|
| |
As UnaBubba points out in his 1st & 4th paragraphs, because you can’t define “it” precisely doesn’t mean “it” doesn’t exist. For, the Halfbakery voting scale is something of a popularity poll and it's as difficult to define as a sense-of-humor. Something strikes you as funny or it doesn’t. Sure, you can explain joke by highlighting its components and ending your dissertation with “Get it?” but in the end, the recipient either laughs or doesn’t. Similarly, you get with a Halfbakery idea or you don’t and you’re reasons for doing may be based on an admixture of objective criteria (clarity, simplicity, usefulness, etc.), as well as subjective criteria (humor). The reason I’ll vote for an idea may be because of one, many, or none of these characteristics. |
|
| |
In contrast, I’ll vote against ideas I feel are mean-spirited or posted out of spite. I never vote against an idea in retaliation for a previous disagreement with the author. Other Halfbakers, however, seem to disagree. It’s funny, the acceptance/non-acceptance of the only two ideas I’ve posted regularly fluctuate around the same 2 or 3 votes shifting back and forth between + or –. Seems then, that an + or – can sometimes come in the form of positive/negative feedback, eBay style depending on whether you've fallen in or out of someone's favor. Whatever. Ideas should stand on their own merits regardless of their authors and I dole out props accordingly. |
|
| |
Every few months someone wants to know what the Halfbakery’s about, why some ideas “win”, why others “lose”, why this idea gets love, while this one doesn’t. All the guidelines, definitions and advice one needs currently exists, if one looks in the sections on “help”, “about” and “best”. The most important part of understanding the Halfbakery, however, is simply spending time auditing it. |
|
| |
Just read the annotations and make up your own mind. |
|
| |
Wish I had posted it: croissant
Annoys me for some reason: fishbone |
|
| |
I don't bother voting that much though. |
|
| |