I think the "digg" model should be applied to all inventions submitted. Hordes of bad ideas bury good ones after a day.
3
3
I do something similar. I skim the ideas. If I think they've got merit, I will rate them. Then I select the options to look at the ones I've rated and choose to vote amongst those.
I’m
quite frustrated that the current system is so time-consuming, but confident Quirky can improve upon it so our time is spent submitting and commenting, not shifting back and forth between pages.
4
Yes! Even something like what we had at namethis, with the new names coming up screened yellow, would help somewhat. But what I'd really love is:
#1: One continuous page. Having to click "next" 8 or 9 times and waiting for each page to download is a real time suck.
#2: A sorting tool, with which we could move names "under consideration" off to the side and then compare/contrast them before voting. As it is now, I have to vote to just keep track of a name I like. Then, if a name comes up that I like better, I have to go to "favorites" to uncheck a box, then go back to the "recents" and find the new one I liked. Very cumbersome and time-consuming.
#3: A realistic rating system. I just can't rate 250 names. It makes more sense to rate only names we LIKE instead of wasting time dragging the sliders from 0 to 1 for names we don't. I'm sure I'm not the only one to forgo rating altogether, which is too bad for the submitter interested in data.
I'm also intrigued by the idea (oft-floated at kluster) of the Three-Step Solution: 1) simple up/downs, followed by 2) Ben & Co. picking the top 25, followed by 3) voting. (You could distribute influence partly based on up/down rating, partly based on final voting.)
The best thing about these options is that users could actually process more submissions. This will be important as Quirky's user base grows. And, to be frank, I find the 3- or 5-submission limit creatively limiting as well; Very often I'm second-guessing myself and "playing it safe." While I understand no one wants to read through 1,000 stupid names, a sorting tool would actually make it faster to evaluate 1,000 names than it is now to evaluate a fraction of that.
#1: One continuous page. Having to click "next" 8 or 9 times and waiting for each page to download is a real time suck.
#2: A sorting tool, with which we could move names "under consideration" off to the side and then compare/contrast them before voting. As it is now, I have to vote to just keep track of a name I like. Then, if a name comes up that I like better, I have to go to "favorites" to uncheck a box, then go back to the "recents" and find the new one I liked. Very cumbersome and time-consuming.
#3: A realistic rating system. I just can't rate 250 names. It makes more sense to rate only names we LIKE instead of wasting time dragging the sliders from 0 to 1 for names we don't. I'm sure I'm not the only one to forgo rating altogether, which is too bad for the submitter interested in data.
I'm also intrigued by the idea (oft-floated at kluster) of the Three-Step Solution: 1) simple up/downs, followed by 2) Ben & Co. picking the top 25, followed by 3) voting. (You could distribute influence partly based on up/down rating, partly based on final voting.)
The best thing about these options is that users could actually process more submissions. This will be important as Quirky's user base grows. And, to be frank, I find the 3- or 5-submission limit creatively limiting as well; Very often I'm second-guessing myself and "playing it safe." While I understand no one wants to read through 1,000 stupid names, a sorting tool would actually make it faster to evaluate 1,000 names than it is now to evaluate a fraction of that.
I’m
happy
3
Agreed. It's tedious, something to do a quick yes/no and then choose from a top 20.... or even a "like" button next to the vote button (it takes more time to click into a submission and--even though I like the sliders--clicking a button is quicker).