From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Dec 01 08:37:43 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:37:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GqBOQ-00073Q-SI for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:37:42 -0800 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.236]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GqBOK-00073I-Cv for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:37:42 -0800 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i11so1000912wra for ; Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:37:35 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=JBCCDTPEjVjLpJTm/mUcZ0hqf5ks32wr2oIG8DYmm2p7s0q6utt5VdkhNQ+CKTj1j/jXtPpYJIcZFNoVpwl7+p/DzFMGHctc0wwsY+t7EgnJjTGIyV0cLHKRqlec08ltGeG7wJc/bG1XsAjLUJ4cRj/sfaaE6y/yPTEb5iDSBhU= Received: by 10.90.51.17 with SMTP id y17mr5375687agy.1164991054927; Fri, 01 Dec 2006 08:37:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.90.104.9 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Dec 2006 08:37:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 12:37:34 -0400 From: Betsemes To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: minor misunderstanding of JSK In-Reply-To: <45705277.6030700@perpetuum-immobile.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <45705277.6030700@perpetuum-immobile.de> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 3743 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: betsemes@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On 12/1/06, Timo Paulssen wrote: > > This means that both > > right and wrong reviews will get mixed up without any means to comment > > and/or challenge the reviews. Anyone should have the opportunity to > > post comments on any review and the translator should have the option > > to challenge the review while explaining why is he/she doing the > > challenging. Since jboselkei in it's current form does not provide for > > this, then it mixes up right and wrong reviews indiscriminately, > > making it an unreliable source of learning material. > > you can of course always look at the Value of a review, which is > calculated from the score of the user that did the review. I have thought on this, but it seems to me that the score has some degree of uncertainty about the value of the review. That uncertainty does not live up to my standards. > > I regarded such an implementation to be top priority over anything > > else, I went eagerly to see what changes were made. Boy, I was so > > disappointed. The looks and feel of the game seemed to be top priority > > rather than improving it's usefulness as a learning tool. > > well, actually i was only called to action by eppcott because he had a > design that he wanted to be implemented and i did just that... > and basically i have to apologise for my dukse lazni ness, but part of > it is caused by my disliking of the uglyness of PHP. OK