Need help? Check out our Support site, then


WordPress.com Forums » Support

12

Blogroll appears in a reversed order of ranking incorrectly

  1. cathicarolblog
    Member

    For the past several weeks now (that I've noticed) my "Links" widget has been ordering my blogroll, which I chose to "Sort by: Link Rating" in REVERSE order of my ratings.

    All of the Links have been rated and the widget appeared fine on my pages for months, so this problem is a new one.

    Anyone else notice this? Is it a glitch? Can I fix it? Is it possible that I changed some default I'm not aware of?

    Thank you very much for your kind response.

    (Would you kindly respond only if you have a suggestion for a solution from experience or training?

    Please don't respond if you wish to inform me that you think that this isn't really a problem and I'm imagining it.

    Please don't assume that I don't know how to operate this widget and try to lead me through steps I'm already familiar with. Thank you for not wasting my time.

    No offense, but can we keep these forums professional, calm, empathetic, our reponses well-thought out and not off-hand or badgering, trying not to inflate the stress level of worried questioners?)

    I've read this (without finding a resolution):
    "Support - Widgets & Sidebars - Widgets » Links Widget"
    at http://en.support.wordpress.com/widgets/links-widget/
    Blog url: http://cathicarolblog.wordpress.com/

  2. cathicarolblog
    Member

    P.S. - my "blogroll" is called "Recommended Websites".

    "Paul Krugman" is supposed to be at the top. "F*** You, Penguin" is supposed to be at the bottom. The order is reversed (on my computer). It was correctly ordered originally.

    I've fiddled with the widget, checking an unchecking defaults, but haven't yet managed to make the widget show the blogroll in the correct order, that is, by my ranking.

    Thanks again for your help, if you have a suggestion, or for forwarding this question to a WP professional, if you can.

  3. timethief
    Member

    This is a peer support forum and we have no means of transferring this to Staff. We can only flag the threads for their attention and this thread has been flagged.

    To contact a "WP professional" and hire them you can use the Code Poet Directory list for Enterprise-level WordPress professionals, web designers, and developers. It’s brought to you by Automattic, the company behind WordPress.com and the largest operator of WordPress sites.
    http://directory.codepoet.com/

  4. cathicarolblog
    Member

    How do you "flag" threads for the staff's attention? Curious. Is it an endowed function or can anyone do it? Thanks.

  5. cathicarolblog
    Member

    Oh, thanks for doing that, by the way.

  6. ardpete
    Member

    Anyone can do it, you just type "modlook" into the tag section.

  7. timethief
    Member

    @cathicarolblog
    You're welcome.

  8. cathicarolblog
    Member

    Is a staffperson there, please?

  9. macmanx
    Happiness Engineer

    It's working as designed.

    When sorting by rating, the links go from highest rating to lowest, and 10 is the highest rating.

    In your widget, the 10s are at the top, followed by the 9s, and so on.

  10. cathicarolblog
    Member

    @macmanx

    Ohhhh. I believe you, but .... are you sure?

    The links in my blogroll widget *were* ordered "ordinally" (rankings "1" listed first, rankings "2" listed next, and so on.), for a long, long time.

    The switch happened later.

    Any thoughts? Thanks.

  11. macmanx
    Happiness Engineer

    I'm not sure why it would have been the opposite before. 10 has always been the highest ranking. Think of it as 10 out of 10 stars.

  12. cathicarolblog
    Member

    @macmanx OK, I believe you and I'll reorder my list (again) *whimper*.

    I was trying to figure it out after I wrote you back. I guess when I thought of numbered ratings ("a rating from 1-10" - http://en.support.wordpress.com/blogroll/add-a-blogroll-link/) I thought of them as "This is my first favorite, this is my second favorite, etc."

    And, I figured (as you subsequently wrote), another kind of rating is the "amount of stars" rating. There, 10 "stars" would be "higher" than 9 "stars" and so on. So, I get it.

    Thanks much! ;)

  13. macmanx
    Happiness Engineer

    You're welcome!

  14. ingridcc
    Member

    This ordering has most definitely been switched! #1 was always first in the listed links up to a month or so ago, then suddenly everything flipped and #1 was last!
    At that time I posted a query in the "widgits" forum on this.
    I and a few others in that thread never received an answer, and finally I gave up waiting and reordered my links.

  15. cathicarolblog
    Member

    @ingridcc / cc: @macmanx

    Re: "This ordering has most definitely been switched! #1 was always first in the listed links up to a month or so ago, then suddenly everything flipped and #1 was last!

    "At that time I posted a query in the "widgits" forum on this.

    "I and a few others in that thread never received an answer, and finally I gave up waiting and reordered my links."

    Thank you ingridcc. I know. This issue should have been investigated by an engineer when I (and others, like you) brought it up. Apparently we are not being believed.

    The answer was denial that something has changed, and the issue has gone into the nowhere bin. That happens a lot with these types of questions: "It was always that way!"

    Getting an answer on the WP forums is so hit or miss, and you get so much abuse just for asking (especially from one particular frequent user whose is so powermad she badgers and insults more often than she is civil), I'm afraid to use it.

    I never use forums elsewhere for these reasons, but WordPress has forced these problems on us no-payers.

  16. ingridcc
    Member

    Well, I wish I had been answered by staff at the time, but I am very appreciative of all the regular forum helpers, myself...They take on a huge no. of queries and send so many people in the right direction, that I really do not take it personally if their quick and usually helpful answers sound brusque or if they use standard form-letter answers for questions that get asked again and again...Most forums I've been on don't have this level of dedicated volunteer help, esp for this volume of questions! I think they are totally "overworked" (without getting paid) right now, because some regulars have backed off after recent unhappinesses with wp staff...I know it can be frustrating sometimes esp if you already know the reference the volunteer is giving! It doesn't mean they think we're idiots, it's just the first obvious answer to give that might well solve the problem...

  17. cathicarolblog
    Member

    @ingridcc / cc: @macmanx

    I'm glad you have had positive experiences.

    I had hoped that using (that is, being forced to use) the WP forums would be a positive experience, but no such luck, due to one very active person in particular, as I have noted.

    I don't ask technical questions or report errors to be condescended to and badgered inappropriately by non-WP staff who have very little technical expertise to begin with and are often wrong in their answers to end with.

    It's embarrassing to be treated so rudely.

    It's just as embarrassing, and it takes me just as aback, to read the same horrible pseudo-superior badgering from the same person to other people on this forum.

    Because of this, I avoid this forum. I don't mind someone being wrong. I do mind rudeness.

    The victims of abuse on this forum seem generally to go silent, as I have in the past, but I can't seem to escape this one particular abuser and I don't seem to receive answers from staff unless I reply to her.

    So it's a trap. Perhaps the WP staff isn't aware of this. Because the WP staff can't be reached any other way, I'm saying something here.

    By the way, I have no interest in being told that my experiences have been misperceived. Victim-discrediting and victim-blaming don't make any sense to me. They shouldn't to anyone.

    I find the enabling and support of abuse horrendous. So my statement stands (except with "who" instead of the typo "whose").

  18. tpr2wp
    Member

    Just piping in to say I used the link rating system tonight for the first time, so as to force them into the order I wanted; & my brain works like the OP, ie, 1 at the top, 2 comes after 1, 3 comes after 2, etc., or, as numbers NORMALLY look:
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    So why it is set up backwards I have no idea. Whattapain. Now have to re-do them all. How about getting rid of "RATING" links (10-1) & call it "NUMBERING" your links to put them in order & have it function the way people actually think (1-10). (Who cares about "rating" links anyway. NUMBERING links is more necessary. "Ratings" is secondary in the realm of "Efficiency.")

    (Geeks & Techies who set up these behind-the-scenes things don't seem to "think" like everybody else, I've noticed over the years across the entire Internet.)

  19. cathicarolblog
    Member

    Thank you, tpr2wp.

    And that is an excellent suggestion. Calling the blogroll's numbering system "Ratings" is confusing, since one of the intended purposes of "rating" the links is to order them numerically.

    It would be nice to be able to order one's Favorite Links precisely. I had accomplished that, actually, by massaging the ratings by keeping the second tier ordering, alphabetical order, in mind. That took me quite a bit of time over several years; I worked hard at it.

    (That there are only 10 designations was always inefficient and troublesome, to me, who wished a precise ordering system. If the assigned numbers are to be considered "stars", "starring" your favorite links is not very useful.)

    So the larger problem for me still is that the order of the links *reversed* a few weeks ago without warning; where originally a rating of "10" would put a link at the bottom of the list now it puts it at the top.

    I'm afraid that I tend to think, still, rightly or wrongly, that there is, or was, a glitch in the WP system - or that a change in website configuration occurred without warning users - that caused this switch, rather than that my memory is faulty. (Like Dennis Miller used to say, though, I could be wrong.)

    If I take macmanx's word for it that it has always been this way, or at least is supposed to be this way, I will have to reorder all of my links after several years of them appearing the way I originally intended. Going through that again is something I have little desire to prioritize. It makes me want to groan.

    What if, in the future, the glitch is investigated, fixed, or explained by someone at else WP, say, an engineer? Then I may have to do all this hard work a third time. Not anxious to do that.

    Thank you again for your feedback, and for your great suggestion.

  20. timethief
    Member

    G'day to you,
    I have flagged this thread for Staff attention.

  21. cathicarolblog
    Member

    Awesome, TimeThief, thank you!

  22. timethief
    Member

    tpr2wp made an excellent suggestion and I don't want Staff to miss noting it. You're welcome. Hope you have a grest weekend. :)

  23. cathicarolblog
    Member

    I thought so, too, and expanded on it, so no qualification is necessary.

    I hope they also note my issue.

  24. tpr2wp
    Member

    Thank you TimeThief! for considering the "numbering" idea "worthy" of staff attention. :) Hopefully it would only require a simple "flip of the switch" in the opposite direction, along with renaming the switch from Ratings to Numbering-in-Order, etc.

    Or, if they want to keep that 10-1 "Ratings/Likes/Star System" for "best/favorite links," that's fine (though I, personally, wouldn't spend time using it), & create an ADDITIONAL brand-new-from-scratch "Number Your Links in Consecutive, Precise Order 1-through-No Limit" Option, hopefully that wouldn't be too hard to do (just a couple of lines of code? I have no clue about that part).

  25. tpr2wp
    Member

    Hi cathicarolblog! You said:

    It would be nice to be able to order one's ... Links precisely.

    A lady after my own heart (an admitted efficiency-fanatic). Loved your word choice, "precisely," & included it in my above bolded description just for you. :)

    You also said:

    ...by massaging the ratings by keeping the second tier ordering, alphabetical order, in mind...

    I've tried that before, too, using the alphabetical/title mode, but it was a bear & didn't work out so well as I had to practically change the titles of other people's sites just to get them in the position I wanted. :) I've never finished the "Links Depts." of my blogs due to that & is why I first tried using the Ratings System the other night, which also didn't work out well (arse backwards, lol).

    That took me quite a bit of time over several years; I worked hard at it.

    I feel your pain! I've got a bunch of links collected over a decade still over at yahoogroups using their Links pages (which, btw, yahoogroups also does NOT have a Numbering Option, but Alphabetical Only. A royal pain there as well. I would use asterisks or other symbols at the front of titles to force them to the top of the list, etc). I'm not too anxious to re-enter all those links, one-by-one, into the WP Links System, especially without a correct-ordering option. I'm thinking to set up all Links in an email, put them in my choice of order, then zap that to blog & put that "Post" into the Menu Bar (bypassing using the Links System altogether. Of course, when you want to add new links you'd have to re-do the post or send a new, updated email list of links, etc.)

    To be continued...

  26. tpr2wp
    Member

    Con't to cathicarolblog:

    Calling the blogroll's numbering system "Ratings" is confusing, since one of the intended purposes of "rating" the links is to order them numerically.

    Very true. I noticed that, too, in the Ratings Description & couldn't quite wrap my mind around its double purpose, so went for an attempted Organizing/Numbering pursuit.

    That there are only 10 designations was always inefficient and troublesome, to me...

    That point really needs to be highlighted. What if I have 30-50-100 links? Would I only be able to put 10 of those 100 links in numerical order, since "Ratings" only offers 10-1? Or am I missing something here? :)

    As far as whether Ratings used to list links 1-10 vs. 10-1, I'm sorry I cannot comment on that since I never tried using Ratings until the other night. But I am with you 100% on this, either way:

    What if, in the future, the glitch is investigated, fixed, or explained by someone at else WP, say, an engineer? Then I may have to do all this hard work a third time. Not anxious to do that.

    Agree & will wait before redoing any further link organizing.

    Thanks everyone!

    (PS: This forum comment system works GREAT even from my "older" 2009 3Gs iphone still using an "older" iOS! The "allowed markup" buttons all work flawlessly in this forum/comments windows > > Much smoother operation here than in "Posts/Pages" windows/toolbars in actual blogs. I wonder what is the difference, techie-wise?)

  27. cathicarolblog
    Member

    tpr2wp, Thank you for the support!

    I ran across this "ratings" list at ABC News yesterday that demonstrates how I thought of the WP ratings widget, i.e., Number 1 is the "best", Number 2 the next best, etc.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2012/08/vertigo-ousts-citizen-kane-on-sight-sounds-top-films-list/

    (Warning: Auto-play video on the page).

    Follow your own instincts on what to do about the problem on your site. When I was a public website administrator I called up site engineers and made sure glitches got fixed. But I'm not sure WP has enought staff, or the interest, to work on problems like this and , and they may never address it.

  28. cathicarolblog
    Member

    tpr2wp,

    Sorry, I missed the first part of your remarks. Thank you for your kind words, your thoughtfulness, and for your work on this, too. Very happy to communicate with a fellow analyst and efficiency person.

    What worries me the most about this issue is that the way the blogroll widget arranged my links *changed*.

    Upon inquiry WP asserted that the links widget ratings system is a "star" system, rather than what it is labeled as, a "rating" or "ranking" system (so that the way my blogroll appears *now* is how it was always intended to appear, based on my rankings.)

    Whatever it is called, I worked with the ratings to make my list appear the way I wanted it to. When the way I arranged my links suddenly flipped, that's what prompted my inquiry.

    That led, thanks to your remarks, and I agree, to a broader discussion of the widget's rating system as a whole. (I might have gone there, too, if WP had shown any interest.)

    There are three issues: 1) that fact that something happened a few weeks ago that suddenly flipped the order of at least some people's blogrolls, 2) the way the blogroll widget's rating system is labeled and explained, the instructions, are confusing, 3) how the ratings actually work, which could be changed to an exact, non-limited ordinal functionality rather than smearyness of "star" ratings, which really don't make sense for this purpose.

    I'm surprised by the dearth of interest and feedback from WP staff.

    As a website administrator I listened closely to (as well as solicited) website users' feedback and when a problem or upgrade seemed indicated, spoke with customer service people and site engineers to see what varied solutions could be implemented, consulted with my editorial colleagues, made decisions, then arranged reconfigurations to the site to make it easier to use, rewrote instructions for users, communicated with and updated all interested users, and did this on a continual basis (the perfect job for an analytical efficiency expert).

    So I keep thinking WP works that way, too, but there has been no communcation after the first statement that things are as they are supposed to be, despite the confusion of the instructions, and there have been no remarks on the change I noticed.

    Perhaps most WP users don't care how the widget works and either aren't bothered by the confusions and inefficiencies or don't want to bother inquiring about them.

    However, it would be wonderful to get some feedback from WP, perhaps instruction rewriting, or a even a coding revamp.

    Or maybe the problem is this forum. I've stated often that I never wanted to be involved in and am now sick of having to use a "forum" system, which ensures denigrating abuse from other users while system administrators completely ignore it.

    (If upgrading will get out of it, that's the most tempting inducement I know to upgrade.)

    Your insight and kindness have made my day.

  29. pcrumm
    Staff

    Howdy all!

    I'm sorry that you're finding the link system ambiguous. Like @macmanx, I've always thought of the "rating" system as a sort of stars system, where you'd reasonably want the highest-rated item to come first.

    If you're not a fan of the current ordering, I'd give creating a custom menu a shot. This lets you have quite a bit of flexibility as far as how things are displayed, and prevents the ordering ambiguity. You can then create a custom menu widget to display the menu you've created.

    Best,
    P.

  30. nq2wp
    Member

    Hi PCrumm: Thanks for the input, but please clarify:

    1. Most themes say: "Your theme supports 1 menu."

    2. So I create 1 menu entitled "Main Menu" that is then selected in the dropdown bar to be used as the horizontal "Navigational Menu" at the top of the page.

    3. Question: Are you saying I can create numerous menus besides that 1-Main.Menu & use those additional menus in sidebar/footer widgets?

    4. Question: If I tap the plus symbol + (top right column) to create a 2nd menu (say, for links-only for a "Site Map" to use in footer widget), will creating that 2nd menu Delete/Destroy/WipeOut my 1st Main Menu? (I'm chicken to try it without your reassurance that my 1st Main Menu will NOT be deleted or lost if I tap the + sign to create a 2nd "Site Map" menu). :)

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Topic

Tags