The site owners and their tech team have now restored the voting process. To vote on a submitted nitpick, choose either "positive" (to vote a nitpick in) or "negative" (to reject a nitpick for posting). A list of either positive or negative votes will pop up. You must select one of the votes from the list. If you don't select one, the first vote on the list will be selected for you - and you don't want that. You also have the option of adding a comment.
Some changes were made to the list of votes. First, misspellings and mispunctuation were corrected. Second, there are some minor changes to the votes, although essentially the same voting options are available:
Instead of "nitpick already exists" we now have "submission duplicates a posted Nitpick."
Instead of "duplicate submission" we now have "Submission duplicates a Nitpick now being voted on."
The "excessive foul language" vote includes "or other Terms of Use violation."
The "All caps" vote now reads "Nitpick is in ALL CAPS or in an unusual font, or contains a link." (Before, we used the "signature" vote if a submission contained a link.)
Vote review is now also functioning. Exactly what effect it will have on your vote level is not fully clear yet, but I'm under the impression it will work the same way as before: enough positive reviews and you gain a vote; enough negative reviews and you lose a vote.
As an MN, I'm one of the people who will be doing vote review, and I wanted to give you fair warning of how I plan to review. Other MNs might have different comments, so these just represent my personal approach.
First, be sure to select a vote from the list. This is mandatory, and if you fail to choose one, the first vote on the list is selected as a default. This would be a problem for you if you're casting a negative vote, because the first vote on the list is "Submission duplicates a posted Nitpick." If the submitted nitpick doesn't already exist, your vote will get a negative review.
Second, the comment box is optional. If you feel like a vote doesn't really capture what you wanted to say about the nitpick, feel free to use it. A good explanatory comment might persuade me to give your vote a better review. On the other hand, a nonsensical comment or one that shows me your vote was unfair might persuade me to give your vote a negative review.
Third, if you abuse the comment box (insulting the nitpicker, including foul language, spamming us with links to inappropriate sites, etc.) I will give that vote a negative review.
Fourth, in the case of duplicate nitpicks (nitpicks already posted), please include a nitpick number in the comment box. For example, if someone submits a nitpick on War, The pointing out that the ZIP code listed in the post office window is for a town in a completely different state, you should vote "Submission duplicates a posted Nitpick" and type "This is the same as Nitpick 63324" (or something to that effect) in the comment box. If you fail to include a nitpick number, you are risking getting a negative review if I can't find the already-posted nitpick you're thinking of. I'm emphasizing this because this is the first vote on the list, and I expect it will get accidentally selected as the default vote by voters with no idea what they're doing.
It would also be a good idea to explain what you mean if the reason for your vote isn't obvious. For example, if you notice the submission is identical to a "goof" already posted on IMDB* and you are casting the vote "Excessive foul language, or other Terms of Use violation," include a comment about the nitpick already being posted on IMDB.
*This would be a TOU violation because the submitter is submitting copyrighted material that IMDB owns the copyright to.
We're not sure, but voting may be temporarily limited to MNs, until final adjustments are made. I wonder if non-MNs can tell us whether voting on submitted nitpicks is available to them yet.
I happened to stumble across the new voting mechanism and apparently voted for a nit. Coincidentally, it was one of my own. I know, because my actual name (or at least what Nitpickers thinks is my actual name) was right next to it!
This is intolerable. Nits need to be anonymous, and one should be precluded from voting on one's own nits.
Why are the programmers re-inventing the wheel here instead of sticking with what was provided?
None of this will matter though until the site gets away from the ridiculous five-items-per-display format. Few are going to wade through page upon page of nits to verify that their candidate nit hasn't already been posted, just as few are going to wade through all the movies starting with a certain letter to find the one of interest. Ditto for the tiny (~20 column) display area.
Show us lots of movies.
Show us lots of nits.
Show us lots of text for each nit and comment.
These are helpful suggestions, but as far as I know Wastech doesn't read this thread. It would be better to put this in the "Glitches/Problems" topic. Maybe it can be moved there, as part of the "progress report" thread?
If you are voting on nitpicks, I encourage you to type something in the "Comments" box, even if it's just the name of the vote you want to cast (e.g., "Didn't happen in the movie"). There may be a glitch that causes the vote you cast not to be the vote that's reviewed. Comments will help explain what vote you meant to cast.
Are submitted comments to be voted on? I haven't seen any link to review submitted comments. Maybe I'm just missing something, or no comments are ready to be reviewed.
Some people call me 49; but it's Mr. 68 to you.
Only MNs can review them. There are a couple hundred in the queue now. But because we have no idea what we're reviewing, the queue will have to wait for now until the bug is fixed.
Just to explain what Mags means, right now there are 254 comments in the queue to be reviewed, but all they have in the list is the submitted comment itself, with no indication as to what nitpick is being commented on. Therefore, no one can vote on the comment since it's impossible to tell whether it's valid or not.
Thanks, that's what I meant to say.
Up until now, we saw nothing but:
Nitpick Title : Al's muttering!
Comment : Mumbling...NOT!
Movie: Aladdin - 1992
Posted By : ***
Detail :
I listened as close as possible and I heard no mumbling! Geez!
And then, having no idea what it was talking about, we'd say to ourselves "Wha??" and not review it.
Now, though, it looks like this is fixed. We can now look at the nitpick itself, plus other comments posted on it, so it makes more sense. I haven't tried reviewing any nitpicks yet, so I don't know if the arrangement is a good one or not, but at least it's possible now.
Are we eventually going to be able to see what other votes have been cast on a nitpick? That would be helpful. Not sure if this is still in the works or if the voting process is now in its finished stage.
Who sees the comment box, btw? Just the submitter?
"I solemnly swear that I am up to no good."
I have asked for both of these to be fixed, but so far they haven't been.
Howdy- I've been gone for a spell, but now I'm back. Forgive me if I missed the answer to this somewhere- I did as best a search as I could what with a few hundred new replies to go through. Anyway, when I logged on, I was able to vote on a few nits but then noticed that I no longer had as many votes as I once did. I'm not too broken up over that but it's been a few days since I logged on and voted and haven't been able to vote since. Is voting ability no longer refreshed on a daily basis?
Welcome back! Have a look at the "Glitches" thread. The site owners were making changes and fixing things, but seem to be absent again.
Ah, so business as usual. Wonderful. Guess I'll just sit in the lobby then and stare at the paintings.
By geode
Date 2008-06-01 12:08
>The site owners were making changes and fixing things, but seem to be absent again.
Yeah, things were really looking hopeful for a bit there!
