"In drafts"
Greetings,% habrauser%!
Once again I want to raise the theme of the "In Drafts" button.
This is terrible functionality. I perfectly understand that it is impossible to completely remove the functionality of such a button. Everyone makes mistakes, someone writes an interesting article, someone does not, but everyone knows perfectly well that articles of some content evoke a lot of emotions and often they result in a negative article. The reason for the minuses can serve not only the content of the article as a whole, but also separate, recklessly abandoned phrases or just a curvature of the syllable (we recall the recent translation of “9 UUU”, which has already been published and removed twice by the author).
How, then, can the “poor” author be saved from the general fall of karma? Is it necessary to save him at all? My answer is definitely necessary. BUT articles or questions once published should not be hidden! And that is why, the button "In drafts", it is necessary to change. In my opinion, there is only one way out - the “block vote” button, then the author will be able to stop his fall as in the case of hiding the article, but the information will remain available to the community.
Well, where to without him! Probably, there is a side effect.
In Habr's case, the idea is that Habr lives on the basis of self-regulation and if there is an opportunity to publish any nonsense with complete impunity, then very quickly the resource will turn into a dustbin and will urgently need moderation. And so, this is not an option. So it is necessary to impose any additional conditions. What can you think of? Well, for example, make the “voting block” button inaccessible to a certain level of votes (or quantity).
')
Alas, this is not the only problem that has visited my sophisticated mind. After the author has blocked the vote, he can edit the article and write there what is boiling and what can not be with
do this. The people will run to minus right into karma, but firstly, not everyone can do this (you need to have something for yourself to merge karma to others), and secondly, dissatisfaction can be removed only once in a lifetime, Habr will not give a second chance . Therefore, as a solution to this problem, you can unlock the ability to vote for an article after any editing by its author, respectively, the threshold counter allowing blocking is reset to zero.
The button "In drafts", of course, must be left until the article has been published, so that you can save it while writing.
Actually, that's all that I wanted to convey to the public and the administration of the resource. I have no doubt that this article (if you can call it that) will be assessed differently. And, of course, I will use the button “In drafts” to save myself in case of such necessity.
Thanks for attention.
The essence of the cry of the soul
Once again I want to raise the theme of the "In Drafts" button.
This is terrible functionality. I perfectly understand that it is impossible to completely remove the functionality of such a button. Everyone makes mistakes, someone writes an interesting article, someone does not, but everyone knows perfectly well that articles of some content evoke a lot of emotions and often they result in a negative article. The reason for the minuses can serve not only the content of the article as a whole, but also separate, recklessly abandoned phrases or just a curvature of the syllable (we recall the recent translation of “9 UUU”, which has already been published and removed twice by the author).
Sentence
How, then, can the “poor” author be saved from the general fall of karma? Is it necessary to save him at all? My answer is definitely necessary. BUT articles or questions once published should not be hidden! And that is why, the button "In drafts", it is necessary to change. In my opinion, there is only one way out - the “block vote” button, then the author will be able to stop his fall as in the case of hiding the article, but the information will remain available to the community.
By-effect
Well, where to without him! Probably, there is a side effect.
In Habr's case, the idea is that Habr lives on the basis of self-regulation and if there is an opportunity to publish any nonsense with complete impunity, then very quickly the resource will turn into a dustbin and will urgently need moderation. And so, this is not an option. So it is necessary to impose any additional conditions. What can you think of? Well, for example, make the “voting block” button inaccessible to a certain level of votes (or quantity).
')
Alas, this is not the only problem that has visited my sophisticated mind. After the author has blocked the vote, he can edit the article and write there what is boiling and what can not be with
do this. The people will run to minus right into karma, but firstly, not everyone can do this (you need to have something for yourself to merge karma to others), and secondly, dissatisfaction can be removed only once in a lifetime, Habr will not give a second chance . Therefore, as a solution to this problem, you can unlock the ability to vote for an article after any editing by its author, respectively, the threshold counter allowing blocking is reset to zero.
Instead of conclusion
The button "In drafts", of course, must be left until the article has been published, so that you can save it while writing.
Actually, that's all that I wanted to convey to the public and the administration of the resource. I have no doubt that this article (if you can call it that) will be assessed differently. And, of course, I will use the button “In drafts” to save myself in case of such necessity.
Thanks for attention.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/147819/
All Articles