It's been pointed out on another thread that the voting buttons probably mean people are LESS likely to use the "share" buttons.
Hubbers like to support other Hubbers and it's all too easy to hit the voting buttons and think we've done our bit - when in fact, we've done almost nothing. If the voting buttons weren't there, we'd have to find some other way of being supportive - and that would likely be the "share" button, which would do some good both for the Hubber and HubPages as a whole.
I don't think removing the voting buttons would result in a person using the sharing button.
I sometimes forget to vote after commenting. I sometimes forget to comment after voting.
I hit all of them when a hub is worth sharing. I enjoyed using that button often during the recent contest. I would not like to see it removed.
I agree Marisa. It's a well known fact that voting has little or no influence on anything anymore. So why have another distraction there?
Never understood what the voting buttons are for anyway? Do HP actually use the information?
I believe once upon a time they helped influence hub score. But after people started abusing them I think they either made the voting non-influential or lowered its value drastically (and that was at least 18 months ago.)
Hasn't it been said that the votes of people with a certain Hubber score have more weight when it comes to the voting button? I'm just wondering if they're always quite as non-influential as you suggest.
That would be silly, I think (not saying it might not be true, though). What makes a high Hubber score opinion worth any more than someone with an average score?
There was a discussion (maybe by Paul Edmondson) about (if I recall correctly) using the plus-one button on Hubs (or anywhere, maybe). Whoever wrote the Hub or blog post (they were from HubPages) about it said how Google will give more "weight" to a person's votes if the person wasn't already "known" to be someone who wildly plus-one'd all kinds of stuff. The comparison was made to the HP vote buttons, and that's where it was said (I'm fairly certain) that some Hubbers' votes are worth more "weight" than others, and I'm fairly certain the comment was that more "weight" was given to Hubbers with a certain score or higher.
Whenever this Hub or HP blog post was written, it was around the time the Google+ accounts were just starting, and the Plus One's had only been around for a relatively short time (but, of course, longer than the + accounts/profiles).
I only say "I think" it was PE because I'm trying to cover myself. I'm pretty sure it was he who wrote the thing and was telling people why they shouldn't wildly Plus One stuff, particularly Hubs. Of course, there's a chance (I don't think a likely one, though) that I misinterpreted what I read.
At the time, I just assumed it was probably because someone who had been here long enough, or worked their way to, a certain Hub score wouldn't be new and/or spammy-types. It has been said in many places that Google "keeps track of" people's Plus One's, and that being too careless and free will result to losing "weight" to one's Plus One's.
In any case, the reference to the HP voting button wasn't the main subject of the Hub/blog. It was just used as frame-of-reference type of thing/comparison type of thing.
Well, if I had any clue as to what creates a high Hubber score, I might believe it.
But as I don't, I'll remain skeptical. Also - as I write this, I'm "100". Tomorrow I might be 97. So my votes are worth more tonight?
(I've since looked for that thing I'm referring to, but I had trouble finding it when I did. I'm sure it's somewhere on here still, though. ) Anyway, the remark didn't say anything about specific Hub numbers. When I read it I read it as more along the lines of something like, "people over 60" or "people of 75" (or 90 - who knows...). Nothing was said to indicate there was anything as nit-picky as any change in "weight" between something like 97 and 100.
It made sense to me, because I was just assuming it would prevent strangers from signing up, being new, having a score of 35 or 50 (if they wrote a Hub), and then voting up (or down) a storm a bunch of stuff.
Ah... Found it: (Fourth paragraph - if my quick counting down is correct)
http://pauledmondson.hubpages.com/hub/R … -and-Money
That's interesting - but not all that relevant. Even if votes by "higher scoring" Hubbers carry more weight, HubPages has said that votes have very little effect on Hubscore. So the difference is likely to be insignificant.
(which would make one wonder why there's the voting button at all). I'm assuming it's for the purpose of going into that "good feedback" accolade; but then I'm wondering if getting enough in terms of "good feedback" may indirectly affect something other than the score).
One question I have, though, is this: I've had Hubs that get 100 for their score (they usually drop back into the 90's and stay there) but that get iffy traffic in general. They may have an increase in traffic immediately before going to 100, and I know number of comments could factor in; but if it's obviously not high traffic and not always comments, where does that 100 score for some of those Hubs come from? I've always assumed it was voting in the case of the ones that are from traffic dynamos when they hit that 100 (or even the 90's).
Yeah, it's all confusing and I'm sure it is confusing for HP too.
I'm sure some of us are honest and judicious in our use of buttons. I'm equally sure that others are petty and try to use them to "punish" those with whom they have disagreements.
I tend toward very sparse use. I'll vote up something I see as really exceptional and vote down utter trash, but very few hubs fall into either category. My pickiness probably isn't ideal for the voting system either.
I haven't read the link yet but i'm glad its their for everyone to see because I would personally hope their is a weighted vote system because with all the fake id's being created could you imagine if their vote counted equally as long standing publishers and they voted down. I've seriously wondered how I'm able to stay in the mid to high 80's usually when i don't participate often , but hopefully it's because when I do I honestly use the vote system accordingly and not excessively. I'm hoping my writing itself is part of that and that others with more weight than a fake ID can see that too and vote up when they truly feel its a good article. Although I do have some doozies !
Things I use to determine if an article qualifies for a vote up plus a few other intersting votes etc.
1.) not full of typos or bad english- few accepted
2.) knowledgeable or well researched
3.) i'm actually truly interested, have been informed, entertained, or other
4.)if the article was interesting enough for me to comment it will likewise get a vote up
5.) must have a part of all these qualities
My Question would be: What is more important for my hub, it being shared or it being voted up?
I honestly believe the vote button is as important as my hub being shared. The more votes you get the better visibility for your hub.
As Cagsil pointed out, maybe change the position of each button for more efficient use.
Why do you say that? Votes are private, and they make no difference to the visibility of your Hub.
Agreed. The only thing they may influence is scores, and Search Engines (where most paying traffic comes from) CANNOT see scores. They just see things like keywords, content, titles/subtitles, urls and backlinks.
I think she meant more visibility on the HubPages site being put on the front pages of hot, best, etc. I think your question is if it is more important to get it 'noticed' on other sites. I think they both have relevance. I think it depends on the amount of people on your wall. I don't have enough on my wall at other sites ( about 10 on each ) to outweigh being noticed here by ( about 65 ) i know. no networking, right!.. I better work on that. To be honest I'm not sure how +1 share works because I'm not sure if it directly sends to your wall or is sent to a hopper as in Stumble Upon where it s able to get more frequent looks. Does the 'Shared' article go to a newsreel of sorts that allows it be seen more frequently or is it just to your wall. If it's the latter than I think the answer to your question depends on where and which sites the Hubber has done more networking (including HubPages). Peer-to-peer I guess they call it !(although I'm not surew if it's helping get exterior search views which pay... Maybe the new HP impressions program will help regardless if found by search or peer-to- peer traffic.)
But that's not the point, Mel. You may not have a big network on other sites, but every time you "share", you're creating a link on an external site, which has a lot more value than a link on HubPages itself.
Google judges the value of a site (including your sub-domain) by the number of other sites that link to it. So we all want as many external links as possible. If real people follow that link, it's a bonus - the main thing is that Google counts it.
Plus, of course, you never know when one of your friends will share what you've posted, and they may have many more friends than you.
I made no such statement. I said that I don't think getting rid of the voting system would make anyone more inclined to share the hub. Plain and simple.
It would take a real lot for me to vote a Hub down. It doesn't take all that much to make me vote one up - just a Hub that I think is generally well put together and offers readers something. Where I look for "exceptional" is with anything I ever share. That's where I'm extremely picky. For all the "zillions" of things that are generally good, it would take something I think is either very noteworthy (for one reason or another) or else important in order for me to share it.
As I think more about this, I think if the vote buttons were removed I'd probably still be as unlikely to share something unless the Hub had really struck me as great. I guess my standard for voting up is that I don't have to love/like, be all that impressed with, or be interested in, the Hub. I only have to think it's a well done Hub (of any kind) that readers will find the same.
It's sharing stuff I'm pretty reluctant to do. I don't like wading through tons of stuff the whole world has shared in one place or another (because what "the whole world" apparently thinks is worth sharing and what any one individual thinks is worth sharing can be very different. It all tends to be a big, uncategorized, willy-nilly, mess. I know this isn't how people "are supposed to do things", but I have a real aversion to the whole "adding-to-the-meaningless-mess" thing.
Yeah.. I understand that aversion.
Though everything is "meaningful" in some sense. Even a lonely "Wassup?" on a Facebook page tells friends that you are alive (and still laconically incoherent, in some cases).
As I know that I'm doing a little more than that and so are you, is it presumptuous to conclude that at least some portion of the known universe will find value in our scribbles?
I don't really think most people out there on the Internet will find much in my scribbles, but I have to not care (and feel pretty uncomfortable about sharing). I just do my thing, hope Google's bots figure out that I'm not a spammer or anything else that's questionable, and imagine my future grandchildren's kids being "completely fascinated" by what their late great-grandmother wrote back in the early 2000's. I'm not above "meaningless", but I like to limit it to my own pages and not drag anyone else's decent material into that particular mix.
People who feel like sharing the content are going to find ways to share it even without buttons. I don't have anything against vote or share buttons.
I guess that's my question then. When you share to your other external site and someones +1's it , is it also going on the other persons wall . Using Facebook as an example. When I 'like' something on someone's wall, I don't necessarily see it go to my wall too. Maybe I have a feature turned off that I don't know about and need to turn it on.
I'm afraid you're asking the wrong person, Mel! When it comes to Facebook and Google+, I'm a real dunce. But like I said, the important thing is that you've created an external link. Whether a real human being follows it isn't all that relevant.
When you click on "like" on Facebook because you see a link you like, then there is a notation on your wall that you "like" that item. It doesn't share it on your wall unless you "share" the link or item.
I'm not sure about Google +1's and it's workings.
A plus one can be done without posting any link at their G+ stream.
I read somewhere that when someone clicks something, be it a poll or what have you, they are more likely to click elsewhere on the page like an ad. Based on that research, then people would be more likely to share after rating.
That said, I think that the vote up buttons are kind of hmm more highlighted in comparison to the share buttons. To be honest, I only recently noticed the share buttons at the bottom of the hubs.
I REALLY need to find that study, though.
I would be interested in reading that. In a way, I can see the principle. When I am shopping (not groceries, but clothes, etc.) I may go in and browse, but if I find something I want, it seems that I usually buy more than one item. On "American Pickers" they sometimes call this phenomenon "breaking the ice."
As an experiment, let's go and add polls to some hubs and see what happens.
I created a thread to test that, feel free to participate and share your findings:
by Julianna 6 years ago
Following this button and receiving countless e-mails about the 'Vote Up and Vote Down' button, is it possible to just eliminate the down button on this site? I believe it would not effect the (algo) of our hubs, but would allow the scores to remain somewhat steady and not drop tremendously when it...
by Lela 6 years ago
I just voted my own hub down because I was trying to use those arrows to scroll with! They look like scrolling arrows, not voting arrows! This is not good.
by Robin Edmondson 4 years ago
Hello Hubbers. We are very excited to announce a week long challenge. Check out our Blog post for more information! Good luck!
by dellea 23 months ago
PROBLEM: Whenever I write a hub on a controversial subject, a number of people create new, fake hub accounts solely for the purpose of posting negative comments and feedback on my hubs and/or threatening me anonymously. These new hubbers have 0 (zero) hubs and no other activity, and they are never...
by schoolgirlforreal 7 years ago
by Barbara Badder 5 years ago
My author score is now 88. I've been active on the forums, hopping hubs, and answering questions. I haven't had this low of score since when I first started. Does removing poorly performing hubs cause author scores to go down or what is the problem?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|