Scores used in a sentence

Scores in a sentence as a noun

As such I'm generally a fan of the scores being hidden.

That way, everyone can have their own home screens, their own music, and even their own high scores.

I really like the lack of comment scores. Things are still sorted, so the cream floats to the top, and it made me realize I felt group-impulses based on the score.

I think one of the problems is that, without comment scores, new users don't have feedback from the community on how they're supposed to act. There's no way for them to learn the culture.

How about switching comment scores on after a certain amount of time? I've found myself especially wanting them when looking through older threads.

Yeah, having got past the initial "ooh, this is cool" phase, I do actually think HN was better off with the comment scores. For example, I was looking at a popular submission the other day and someone had said "Hey is there a PHP port of this?"

Once your scores are high enough, nobody is going to say "well Bob and Melinda are both cool, but Bob has a 2310 while Melinda has a 2270, so we should clearly go with Bob." That's just absurd - they always go with the person who will contribute more to Yale. I hope that dispels some of the myths you see and hear.

Parents have trouble connecting authentically with their children--imagine doing it with scores of students per semester. And when it comes to bullying, most teenagers downplay to avoid being though of as a snitch.

If there is nothing that can be done to successfully insulate a tool from unexpected behavior like this, then that tool scores less in evaluations that consider the risk of using it. npm, at this point, has more going against it in the discussion than going for it right now.

I expect the current masking of comments will provide less biased voting, so I think displaying comment scores on stories that are more than two months old would eventually provide the best of both worlds.

If students expect 90-100% scores are possible, and then they start a subject where all of a sudden that's not true, then they're not going to deal with that well. Whereas if everyone's getting results in the 60-80% range, it sets up an attitude that "this is hard, but that's okay -- it's meant to be, and there's no shame in realising that there's a lot left to learn."

Putting down original reporting as an example of "seen it all before" is disingenuous at best — according to the unwritten rules, one never scores points with "this is nothing new"; it's practically expected. Frankly I'm a bit tired of all the negative comments about the NYT, The Economist and other respected establishments by simple reflex.