General discussion
WOT 3 beta testing team
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 13:16:11 — Deborah S.Welcome to the WOT 3 beta testing team! This is the place to discuss the new version of WOT, make suggestions and leave feedback. Thanks for being a part of this important group.
Scorecard: Comments: Editing
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 14:17:06 — phyzomeIf I check "agree" on someone's comment, and they edit it, what happens? Do I still "agree" with it?
Here's my suggestion: Upon edit, all "agree" marks should be invalidated. Users would have a place to re-validate their agreement with edited comments. (No need to keep old versions of comments -- just allow users to say "Yeah, I still agree" or "No, I don't agree.")
RE: Scorecard: Comments: Editing
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 14:23:56 — ditherI agree.. but don't edit your post otherwise I might have to change my mind. :P But seriously, that is a good idea.
Good idea!
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 15:47:20 — voyagerfan5761Editing comments is always a tricky thing to deal with. That's a good idea! Though if "agree" marks are to be invalidated, shouldn't "Flag" marks be cleared as well?
Editing Comments
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 18:18:01 — azpilotIt does seem as though all previous agreements (or not) should be invalidated after an edit. However, how are the WOT ratings themselves handled when a web site is found to have changed substantially? At one time it may have gained a trusted rating but, for example, it comes under new management and begins containing spyware.
Re: Editing Comments
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 19:33:00 — SamiYou're right, it's very much possible for a site to change from trustworthy to unreliable over time as companies go bankrupt, for example. I think I might have covered this in one of very first blog posts, but I could be wrong.
So basically, the problem is that users rate a website, the site dies a few years later, users move along and forget about ever rating it. Then the domain name is sold to a highest bidder and the new owner turns out to be a scammer.
WOT solves this by considering old ratings to be less valuable than new ones, which are naturally based on fresh experiences. Of course, there are a large number of other factors involved too, but this allows ratings to adapt in a situation where a site's trustworthiness suddenly changes.
Just in case anyone is wondering about their ratings losing value, there's no need to worry, ratings are refreshed every time the add-on loads them from our server.
Re: Scorecard: Comments: Editing
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 16:40:22 — SamiAll valid points. Thanks for the feedback!
Scorecard:adding comments
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 17:11:55 — VednierHello, i Russian speaking user, so i tried to add comment in cyrrilic symbols, since this site localized also in Russian ans using UTF-8 codepage i expected no problem at all....but after adding commen i see it as "?????????? ?????????? ????????? ???????", you can see it here - http://www.mywot.com/ru/scorecard/webmoney.ru
This is just a bug or whole system no created to accept comments in non-latin languages?
I.m using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9pre) Gecko/2008041406 Minefield/3.0pre
Re: UTF-8
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 17:15:00 — SamiYes, it's a bug. We'll look into it, thanks for reporting the problem!
Edit: Btw, this is exactly why we need your help testing the site. Keep the reports coming!
Edit 2: UTF-8 issues with comments are now fixed. Let us know if they're not.
"I agree" not working
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 17:57:51 — lordpakeAs topic says, the function "I agree" in scorecard does not seem to work ATM. Gives a small popup about service not being available.
Comment editing not functioning
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 18:11:32 — lordpakeTried to edit my comment (9down.com) in Fx 2. Pressing the Edit button didn't do a thing. Using NoScript with scripts allowed for this site. <-- Ignore this :) Seems to work now
Re: "I agree" not working
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 18:34:19 — SamiPress Ctrl+Shift+R to reload the page and try again. It's probably just someone tweaking things at our end.
"I agree" issue
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 18:45:20 — lordpakeThat Ctrl+Shift+R seems to have solved the issue.
I want a russian language at your forum!
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 18:36:50 — АртемийWhy not include to a forum sections with different languages? It would be very convenient! On a Russian-speaking forum to put moderator Russian, and that badly turns out, the interface Russian, and a forum English! ? :-(
(Sorry, i now english language not good...)
Artemij, it is better to
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 19:14:55 — Alex TracerArtemij, it is better to give some time for developers to fix UTF-8 support in WOT commenting system. I think there will be russian forums too but you should wait a bit.
PS: I'm russian too.
Hmm...
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 19:27:06 — Alex TracerSeems like UTF-8 problem is already fixed. It is possible to use russian letters in comments.
Re: Hmm...
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 19:34:25 — SamiYes, it should be fixed. Thanks for the confirmation though!
Scorecard comments and postcount
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 21:02:11 — lordpakeSmall oddity: the number of my scorecard comments seem to be added to my postcount. However when accessing My posts in My Page, it only shows my entries in blog comments and forum. I don't seem to be able to see a list of my comments anywhere. Only when again viewing scorecard for some site I can see the comment for that specific site.
Scorecard comments
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 21:29:14 — TimoYou are right, the scorecard comments are added to the postcount in My page, but they are not shown at My posts. It's good idea to add the scorecard comments to My posts as well. Thanks for the idea.
UTF-8
ti 15. huhtikuuta 2008 21:13:52 — VednierYes, i can confirm, non-latin comments now working fine.
And, about, language separated sections on forum - i think it's too early. Not enough international users at present time
Fairly good but..
ke 16. huhtikuuta 2008 00:54:25 — wehaveitallI like wot 3.0, but I think there are some things that should be changed/added
1. You can only view comments if you view the scorecard. Something showing part of the message followed by read more in the actual rating window would be helpful. For example a comment might look like this.
This site is somewhat spammy, it..... Read more
Second of all, it should be more clear what the people icons by the rating are. Putting a reliability, or number of raters, would be helpful
Another important feature i think would be to include whats on the demo page in the actual rating window, so you can check a site quickly and easily. In other words, put the same search box that's on the demo page, right under activity score, or really anywhere on the rating window.
Finally, a lighter colored rating window like before would be better. The green section indicating excellent, the red section indicating unsafe, etc are much darker than in wot 2.0, however at least a little lighter would be nice.
Overall however, I like wot 3.0. The scorecard is very nice, and I'm happy to see you encorporated my suggestion that I posted: http://www.mywot.com/en/forum/98
Thanks!
Ben
Happy with colors?
ke 16. huhtikuuta 2008 01:40:58 — BuBBySome will like the colors - others will not - some users are completely color blind...
Perhaps having a choice of 2 or 3 options for colors, and a choice that can be used independent of color (maybe black and white or different icons).
Each user can pick a style (locally) that suits - and almost all users will be more satisfied. Some will like dark, some bright, some alternate colors entirely.
Maybe different shades picked out by the user from a color palette for a custom mix.
Colorblindness is important!
ke 16. huhtikuuta 2008 03:23:18 — phyzomeSomething like 6 to 8 percent of men are red-green colorblind. The linear trust scales are probably fine, but the color-only indicator is not going to be very useful to a goodly chunk of WOT's userbase.
I'd recommend using a dial-type indicator, or a pie wedge that can go from 0 degrees to 360 degrees. It could be specified as an alternative in the settings.
Re: Colorblindness is important!
ke 16. huhtikuuta 2008 04:00:00 — SamiWe hear you and in fact, we have something very cool in the works to make both the add-on and the scorecard more accessible. I was quite impressed by the work of our design people myself and I'm not easily impressed. Unfortunately, there just wasn't enough time to include it in the v3 beta, but it's coming.
Re: Fairly good but..
ke 16. huhtikuuta 2008 04:14:00 — SamiThanks for the comments. The colors on the rating bar are intentionally darker in this version to focus your attention from your own rating to the community rating, because that's what most users are looking for when they open the window. As you notice, the rating bar is even darker if you have already given a rating. If you haven't rated a site and move your mouse over the rating bar, it becomes brighter. I know the colors may need some getting used to after the old version though.
Colors
to 17. huhtikuuta 2008 02:46:17 — wehaveitallStill, an option allowing you to choose your brightness would be nice.
Ps: PLEASE look at this http://www.mywot.com/en/forum/1220 I posted it a second time as the first time it was completely ignored
WOT 3
su 20. huhtikuuta 2008 02:36:02 — Seattle JohnYes! I really like the vers. 3 WOT. The comments section makes a lot of sense.
If my rating varies from the overall rating, I should explain WHY. Also great sites should be rewarded, and dangerous ones should be explained. Some users may ignore a red circle, but if they see that the site is known for a specific problem, they may be more careful about visiting.
WOT 3 works & feels great. I have been revisiting some previously rated sites just to add a comment. I feel that it makes my ratings more relevant.