This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about cookies.
Skip to main content
Metadecidim's official logo
  • English Triar la llengua Elegir el idioma Choose language
    • Català
    • Castellano
Sign Up Sign In
  • Home
  • Processes
  • Assemblies
  • Initiatives
  • Consultations
  • Conferences
  • Help

Propose new functionalities for Decidim software

#DecidimRoadmap Designing Decidim together

Phase 1 of 1
Open 2019-01-01 - 2030-12-31
Process phases Submit a proposal
  • The process
  • Debates
  • Propose new features
  • News
chevron-left Back to list

Improve the score of comments

Avatar: Pablo Aragón Pablo Aragón verified-badge
09/07/2018 11:04  

The ranking of comments uses upvotes−downvotes.

Thanks to David Ruescas (nVotes), I found a blog post from 2009 remarking that this is a wrong strategy (http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html). For instance, a comment with 100 upvotes and 0 downvotes and a comment with 1000 upvotes and 900 downvotes would be equally scored. One could expect this would be solved using the average rating (upvotes/(upvotes+downvotes)), however, such strategy is also inappropriate because there will be many comments with few votes and, therefore, high uncertainty.

To solve the above problem, the blog post suggests using the lower bound of the Wilson score confidence interval. Please find the formula implemented in Ruby in the blog post, as well as this detailed explanation of why Reddit is using this method https://medium.com/hacking-and-gonzo/how-reddit-ranking-algorithms-work-ef111e33d0d9

  • Filter results for category: Comments and deliberation Comments and deliberation

List of Endorsements

Avatar: Xabier Xabier verified-badge
Avatar: Pablo Aragón Pablo Aragón verified-badge
Avatar: Carol Romero Carol Romero verified-badge
Endorsements count3
Improve the score of comments Comments 3

Reference: MDC-PROP-2018-07-13043
Version number 1 (of 1) see other versions
Check fingerprint

Fingerprint

The piece of text below is a shortened, hashed representation of this content. It's useful to ensure the content hasn't been tampered with, as a single modification would result in a totally different value.

Value: 729dab60f6843e977d94a20119df6dc48a5ff87694f7d87395283aebf35b449d

Source: {"body":{"en":"The ranking of comments uses upvotes−downvotes. \r\n\r\nThanks to David Ruescas (nVotes), I found a blog post from 2009 remarking that this is a wrong strategy (http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html). For instance, a comment with 100 upvotes and 0 downvotes and a comment with 1000 upvotes and 900 downvotes would be equally scored. One could expect this would be solved using the average rating (upvotes/(upvotes+downvotes)), however, such strategy is also inappropriate because there will be many comments with few votes and, therefore, high uncertainty.\r\n\r\nTo solve the above problem, the blog post suggests using the lower bound of the Wilson score confidence interval. Please find the formula implemented in Ruby in the blog post, as well as this detailed explanation of why Reddit is using this method https://medium.com/hacking-and-gonzo/how-reddit-ranking-algorithms-work-ef111e33d0d9"},"title":{"en":"Improve the score of comments"}}

This fingerprint is calculated using a SHA256 hashing algorithm. In order to replicate it yourself, you can use an MD5 calculator online and copy-paste the source data.

Share:

link-intact Share link

Share link:

Please paste this code in your page:

<script src="https://meta.decidim.org/processes/roadmap/f/122/proposals/13043/embed.js"></script>
<noscript><iframe src="https://meta.decidim.org/processes/roadmap/f/122/proposals/13043/embed.html" frameborder="0" scrolling="vertical"></iframe></noscript>

Report inappropriate content

Is this content inappropriate?

Reason

3 comments

Order by:
  • Older
    • Best rated
    • Recent
    • Older
    • Most discussed
Conversation with Xabier
Avatar: Xabier Xabier verified-badge
16/07/2018 12:36
  • Get link Get link
In favor  

Thanks @elaragon , this is a very valuable input. It also seems relative easy to implement. It is important to be able to explain this to participants as well. Because very complicated mathematical formulaes are hard to understand and trust on the platform is important for its success.

Avatar: Pablo Aragón Pablo Aragón verified-badge
01/08/2018 10:50
  • Get link Get link

I totally agree, moreover, the simpler -> the easier to understand -> the "more democratic". For that reason, as shown in https://planspace.org/2014/08/17/how-to-sort-by-average-rating/, we could use Laplace smoothing instead: (upvotes+α)/(upvotes+downvotes+β) ; (for example, α=1 and β=2)

Avatar: Xabier Xabier verified-badge
01/08/2018 18:40
  • Get link Get link

Sounds good too!

Add your comment

Sign in with your account or sign up to add your comment.

Loading comments ...

  • Terms and conditions of use
  • About the community
  • Download Open Data files
  • Metadecidim at Twitter Twitter
  • Metadecidim at Instagram Instagram
  • Metadecidim at YouTube YouTube
  • Metadecidim at GitHub GitHub
Creative Commons License Website made with free software.
Decidim Logo

Confirm

OK Cancel

Please sign in

decidim Sign in with Decidim
Or

Sign up

Forgot your password?