Poll: What are your thoughts on ratings?


As I’ve been rehauling the site, I’ve been considering making adjustments to the rating system. I think it works fairly well for Underground articles, but for regular articles I’m not sure if it serves a legitimate purpose.

The reason it works for Underground articles is because only people who are paying to read the article are voting, which means (A) they have a reason to vote, since the ratings dictate which authors get more writing opportunities and (B) there is less chance for the system to be “gamed,” i.e. making fake accounts to rate an article up.

For regular articles, I worry about authors being disappointed by their rating (and consequently becoming sheepish about writing again), and also, like I mentioned, the system being gamed.

I see three possible ways to go here:

  • Leave things as they are (all articles can be rated)
  • Only have ratings for Underground articles
  • Only let Underground members rate articles (but all articles can still be rated)

What are your thoughts?


I’m not completely sure what good purpose the ratings serve for non-UG articles.

I think 6P has moved on a lot from the days where the occasional terrible article got on the FP. Nowadays that stuff gets rejected at the draft stage.

People seem to like/expect to be able to rate things because they can give an opinion without having to put any effort or thought into it and be under the impression that it somehow matters.


That’s a great point – part of this is that if I can remove the ratings module from regular articles, the link to comment will be the first thing to appear at the end of each article, and I’m hoping more people do ask questions and leave comments rather than lazily leave a “like.”