Update voting.md #15
Update voting.md #15
Conversation
Update 55.md
Substitute "alter" for "ater"
|
92d8fb9 and 3d73df0 should not be included in this PR only b967523. Substitutes "alter" for "ater" at https://webwewant.fyi/voting/. Should this PR be closed, forked branches deleted, refiled without the former two commits? |
|
Nope, it’s good. Thank you! |
|
@aarongustafson BTW, the "voting" mechanism is not immediately clear. Why is "voting" necessary at all? What does a "vote" objectively mean relevant to the "want"? The Web We Want does not need to store user data if you still have the concept that a "vote" has some value re the site. Will more than likely file an issue to describe precisely what mean. |
|
I made a few updates to the "voting" page. Let me know if that takes care of clarifying things. |
|
Why cannot the site use a |
|
I’m not averse to it, but we don’t have a backend (and I’d rather not create one). Do you have thoughts on how that could be accomplished? |
|
If there is no backend how does
occur at all per the current language of "voting.md"? You can use this GitHub repository. File an issue with each comment being the "want" from the .fyi site. Count the +1's for each comment. |
No. Either the vote means everything or the vote means nothing. "will take vote tallies into account" is akin to an electoral college blackbox. "account" for exactly what? Meaning the interpreter of the "vote" can take any vote "into account" yet ignore the vote at their own discretion. Again, why is any "vote" needed at all? Since "The browser vendors and standards bodies" do what they please anyway, with any proposal and/or arbitrarily why would that not be the case with "The Web We Want". Are "webmentions", "bookmark" and "like" links related to the initial sentence "If you build websites, you inevitably run into problems. Maybe there’s no way to achieve an aspect of your design"? |
|
From perspective here the criteria should be the first and second sentence at "Home" meaning if a single or more than one "want" is "selcted" for further consideration that consideration should be based on the difficulty of achieving the expected output, both at all, and by way of possible workarounds. What is or are the most technically challenging and difficult to achieve "want" irrespective of any "vote" or Popularity. If a "vote" must be done, and the criteria is number of votes for some form of "selection" one other alternative would be to create branch in the repository for each "want" and count the forks over a given span of time, for example, 30 days. |
|
Will this vote @dsanders11 https://webwewant.fyi/wants/7/ be reflected on the page at Votes: N? |
|
It should. Making sure Brid.gy has access to the project now… |
|
Looks like it shows up. Should be collected in the next hourly build. https://webmention.io/api/mentions.jf2?target=https://webwewant.fyi/wants/7/&token=bUYdf3WnNBc0-i6cq47EXw |
No description provided.