This whole ratings things brings up one of the most annoying things I find about uploading to ticalc.org. If you create a program for the TI-89, TI-92+, and V200, you have to upload it once for each calculator, even if it's the same zip. What I'd like is the ability to select 68K Assembly Math Programs, or the like, to upload one file to all three calculators. Then, in your databases, when someone views the TI-89 Asm Math programs, they see the TI-89-specific math programs, as well as the 68k-generic ones as well. How does this relate to the ratings? Well, this means that the same program could potentially occupy 3 spots on the 25 toplist! If you implemented my above suggestion, that would simplify the archivers' jobs and you would only have to rate one version of each file.

Well I have been saying this for the past year or so...

You can request a "link" from one file in any other directory. Thats why there is that little "Comments to Archiver" box. What does this do?

Well I am glad you asked. On any directory page that the one file is linked to the description, download link and link to the fileinfo page will be displayed as well (just as it is where the original file was uplaoded to). There will be only one file and all the downloads from the seperate directories will accumulate under the one file. And thus there is only one file, that way it does only appear on the top stats pages once.

So use that ol comments to archiver box, for something else tan saying "hi." Which I'll have to admit always makes me smile :-)

If you would like an example of a program that already is doing this go to the link above or to http://www.ticalc.org/ pub/v200/asm/games/ and click on the icon to arena3d.zip (the top file). You will notice that once you get to its fileinfo page that it says the directory the file is in is TI-89 ASM games however you clicked the link from the Voyage 200 directory.

I'll be making a ticalc.org FAQ specific to ticalc.org this summer that has this type of information in it. However I do believe that we can add a little snip to the upload form about using the "Comments to Archiver" box as a place to request links to other directories.

a few months ago you (or maybe joey) said that you almost never read the comments and that that wouldnt be an effective way to, say, get a program featured. Does this mean that you actually do read that box?

The one time I requested that a file be uploaded to all the directories, my request was effectively ignored. I'll have to work on that. In the meantime, can I request that certain files be "merged"?

It shouldn't be allowed to upload the exact same file to 3 different archives IMHO, simply because it ruins the 'busiest authors' rank. If dynamic links exist AND work well, AND there are some people who use it, why do you guys at ticalc.org keep allowing some people to upload the exact same file 3 times?

IMO, repeated files should be removed and linked.

Congratulations on the ranking system btw, it seems to be working very well :)

I wonder why you had to make things so overly complicated with all the weighting. A rating system is self-regulating. When something gets rated high, it'll get more attention and will be rated down again if necessary.

The system as it is now, isn't intuitive. It'll become such a typical thing every newcomer will wonder about. How the hell can you get 10+/10? If you don't believe this, it has already been asked on this very own article.

Another thing I find bad about it, is that older programs have once again an advantage over newer ones. They already have it on the download/author statistics and I had hoped that a file rating system would make things more fair.

So while mathematically probably very nice, I find it a poor design choice, but that's just me of course.

Anyway, I understand if I'm too late with my ranting, but I don't visit ticalc.org as often anymore as I used to. I must admit that it's good to see some more activity on this site again though!

Yes, they should rather implement a Nectarine-like system instead. See link (which doesn't work at the time of writing this post, bummer).

I have a question. Does the weighting have the opposite effect on the other side of the scale? Is a program with ten 1's worse than one with only five?

Hey! Good point! May we have an explaination?

Nice job. Now we just need ratings to be displayed on file information pages. Keep up the good work!

BTW Have you consitered slightly different weighting
systems for diffrent catagories? Exp. TI-82?

Oh. It is on the Info pages. akjsghlkasjkhdfb kljahbikhgfu (result of wacking head on keyboard)

hmmm... seems as if I suggested this idea awhile ago. Just out of curiosity, was it my suggestion that inspired the "busiest reviewers" toplist?