Discourse is open-source. If you really like that bug for your forum it shouldn’t be that much trouble to roll back to pre-fix no?
I know techreport.com has a feature where you actually do get the right to double and even triple vote posts if you become a gold paying member:
http://techreport.com/blog/26153/introducing-tr-subscriptions
The power to upvote or downvote posts in the comments section as many as three times.
So.. how much cash / flooz / stellars / linden dollars do you have on you right now @matches?
Summoning @pjh to figure out this black magic for free!
Following that line of reasoning, perhaps Leaders could be given the ability to double like and Elders triple like, or something like that…
Filed under: Suggestions for version 1.1.
That weighting is for topic summary mode, e.g. this:
You’ll see that on any topic with more than 50 posts, it is the Reader’s Digest Condensed Version aka “Ain’t nobody got time to read all that!” mode.
It’s still one like, it just counts more toward the “is this one of the more interesting posts in the topic” rating if it’s from staff.
So the summary algorithm assumes that staff members are better able to judge what is important on a topic?
For that to really work, the staff members better not be liking anything just because they like it, or because it made them laugh. Maybe discourse should warn staff members to only like post s which are most important to the topic. This could be done every few hundred likes, just to remind them that their likes have a heavier impact on the summary.</sarcasm>
On a more serious note: why was this weighting even put in place? It doesn’t really make sense to weight likes for just staff. Realistically, it would make more sense if the likes were weighted on a graduated scale. Something along the lines of:
- Level 0: weight factor 0.5
- Level 1: weight factor 0.75
- Level 2: weight factor 1
- Level 3: weight factor 1.5
- Level 4: weight factor 2
- Staff: weight factor 3
Of course, for that to really work, the applicable weight factor would have to be stored as part of the like. That way a user shifting between trust levels wouldn’t affect the summary of a topic.
Weighting by trust level could also make sense for this metric, I agree with that. A like by a brand new user isn’t worth as much as one from a TL3.