Likers/ Critics?

Matthew, is this a tally of the thumbs up/ downs we get?

I'm still working out one last kink from the system --

But the Likers / Critics part already works.

It tells you how big of a crowd has given you at least ONE like or ONE dislike. It doesn't tell you how many; just the number of UNIQUE LIKERS and UNIQUE CRITICS that have ever given you a thumbs up or thumbs down.

After all, you could have Pope Augustine come on here with one or two followers (read: fanatic zealots) and give said "pope" a very high reputation.

But with this new feature, it would show "Likers: 2" so you'd know his apparent stellar reputation is due to a tight-knit fan club, and doesn't reflect the general CathInfo membership at all.

You're going to love the next feature, if I can figure out what I did wrong (I was programming very late at night; usually not a good idea! You make a lot of mistakes.)

If the same poster gave you a "like" and a "dislike", would that poster be counted as a liker AND a critic?

Yes.

The goal of this particular feature is to show the "broadness" of one's popularity. To give the Reputation figure a bit of depth.

Ok -- the new feature is done.

Hover over "Likers" or "Critics" to see what % of your total (Likes, Dislikes) came from your Top 3 fans/critics.

Obviously, a person with 100 dislikes from 100 people is a different sort of person than someone with 100 dislikes from ONE individual! The latter might be a saint, who has managed to make ONE fervent enemy.

Again, this is to give more transparency and meaning to the Reputation number.

Sounds good to me. Also still looking forward to the "top posts" feature.

What's with all this voting and number-crunching?  Why encourage a popularity contest? Why promote such concern for human respect?

I think the "like" and "dislike" of a praticular post is very helpful.

The only thing I find beneficial about the reputation count is that it encourages some people to post more regularly. Very minimal benefit imo.

Quote from: jllsjlls

Quote from: Jitpring

What's with all this voting and number-crunching?  Why encourage a popularity contest? Why promote such concern for human respect?

I couldn't agree more. The idea of a Catholic caring about what others think or may think about them or being concerned for his/her reputation seems pretty ridiculous to me.

Quite the contrary, I believe it makes more harm than good. It only flatters the more popular ones (which is certainly a very bad thing) and alienates the least popular ones, and incites a certain bias (even if subtle) in this regard.

Who pays attention to such popularity markers?

Each time I say with St. Peter Damian: "For I pay attention to what is said, not to by whom it is said." (And this he said when he was arguing that Early Church Father and Doctor of the Church, St Jerome had erred in his understanding of Divine Omnipotence.)

Matthew's intent was not to turn it into a popularity contest. He brought in the feature to make a distinction between the more well-respected posters here on CatholicInfo and the not-so-well-respected. Most people here are mature enough to know not to turn it into a popularity contest.

A popularity contest may not be his intent, but it'll be the result.

As for making the distinction, why not let each post speak for itself?

Is applause a measure of merit? It's a measure of approval, not of merit. Jesus Christ received no applause on Good Friday, though He of course infinitely merited it. The amount of applause one has accuмulated has nothing to do with the merits of any particular post.