I think it’s great. For the ones where the real author got beaten in time, maybe give a mixer an option to ‘challenge’ the first-date author, which sends a note to the other mixer and hope that one of the two parties ‘concedes’ authorship, and then confirms that with a signal back to you to update the database.
What if they genuinely came up with it separately. Chances are low? Dual authorship.
But yes I think for recipes that people actually care about (hence I like the author initiated scheme, else your creating extra headaches and work that no-one really cares about, or just delete them) An established initial author is important.
If you hide duplicates, how do you hide them? By their flavours? What if their percentages are slightly different? Would everything have to match? Could you lose valuable notes this way?
Recipe category’s would be great, I’d imagine the creams / custards category would be pretty full though lol
I think he is saying he would just force the duplicates to be private. They would be ‘hidden’ from being ‘public’, but not hidden from the creator of the private recipe.
And he already mentioned above that they have to be all exact ingredients and percentages to be considered ‘duplicates’.
Hide the ones that don’t have more than two or three ratings.
This will sort out a lot of the confusion.
Also force all recipes private as default.
Let them all be public, why force to hide someone’s recipe?
What if I want a friend to follow me or want to share my recipes?
Better filtering and categorisation is the best solution imo
This is great. I’d love to hear more input on the matter - It’s not a small thing to be messing with
I think or wish it appeared as if the recipe was public but only that person with the copy saw it, and when someone commented on that copy the comment attached to the original, and when someone shared a link to their copy the clicker would be directed to the original instead of the copy. Of course this would take so much programming it would be difficult to implement.
I Love ELR
Forced default doesn’t mean you are unable to make it public. It simply means it starts out private and only goes public if you specify.
You can share private recipes, all you have to do is switch them to public.
It seems my recipes are already private by default. If I make them public there has been so many changes it’s really a new recipe, but even then I try to name the originator so folks can search and see the original recipe. What i see as undesirable is a copy of a recipe with 4.9 stars and a page full of comments, and looking back to the originators recipe and seeing lower ratings and fue comments.
That’s the default right now… It is working, but there are still people who make the adapted, unchanged version public for some reason.
You can also share private recipes with friends
If this new thing comes about, if I make a recipe up, and it is the same ingredients as another recipe (un beknown to me), would I get a message come up telling me that the recipe I just made was the same as another already in the system (along with a link to it)? If so I like that idea a lot.
One other thing that needs (or should be) looked into and what has been attempted to be worked on is (yeah I know I keep harping on this)… the ingredient list. This new thing isn’t going to work well if someone just changes the ingredient from (FA) Fresh Cream to (FA) Cream Fresh or FA - Cream Fresh unless the system understands those are the same things.
That would allow the hooligans to slightly change their recipe in an attempt to include it into the database.
Their are some folks on the internet who will adapt/publish in an attempt to clog the database. I think its the same folks who put 25% cowboy blend into a recipe hoping to foul the system and get someone to actually try it. And the same individuals who keep downrating recipes just to affect the ratings, IMO the steps to quell their activity should be done behind the scene without the hooligans knowledge.
sorry for not making a lot of sense, i had surgery today and am recovering with a dose of pain pills and bush beer.
I got to give this a like because…Busch Beer. It’s that, “I got 3 more days till payday” go to brew.
You know what would be cool? When someone tries to make and adapted or identical recipe public and it won’t work. They get a warning message “we’re sorry but the recipe you are trying to make public is already published on ELR. You can only save this as a private recipe.” Then maybe provide the link to the public recipe. Oh yeah, that would rock. Of course it also might usher in a swarm of recipes that vary only slightly, like one ingredient off by 0.01%. Seems for whatever reason these folks publish a copied recipe, they will still do it even if it means changing it slightly.
I was looking for how to share privates with friends earilier.
private “recipes”, lol.
Yea, I just guessed that some peoples defaults were to off since there was so much junk out there.
One step ahead of the game @daath, interested to see the results of our new filing system.
I know… Recipes are private by default anyway…
Maybe a couple of radio button alongside the Save button, that at least one has to be highlighted before you can save it, with say something along the lines of “is this an original recipe” or a “copy of”? if original selected it gets published if copy it stays private by default?
A bit like, it won’t let you purchase something at an online store radio button, till you have clicked I have read the T&C’s first button
I think the “share private recipies with friends” doesn’t work for example for vape shop owners who want to link their “My recipes” page so that customers know what they can make.
This is something that’s confused me for quite a while. The application of the chosen terminology.
To me, copy means just that. All aspects of the recipe should be transferred as a whole, into “my recipe database”. Now if that’s the way it works great! But I don’t remember seeing a “Copy” button. I just learned to ‘abuse the favorite button’ as a result. So the only recipe in my “box” is the one I manually entered.
But then when I read daath’s statement above, I go right back to being confused. I’ve never been able to make sense of (or use, as a result of) the whole copy/adapt thing. “the adapted, unchanged version” is not an adaptation if nothing has been changed. It’s a copy, and until it’s adapted (changed) it should absolutely be private, and I would take that one step further, and make sure there way no way for the copy to be made public by the user. Again, until adapted.
As daath already knows, I’ve been a strong proponent for grouping/sorting/categorization features for months on end. But that’s more to @Grubby.
I also agree that the original author should get credit, not just the first to post. I like the idea above for a “dispute button” or such. For cases where the author decides to become part of the community. (IE: EJAB -my only ‘recipe’ thus far, or Wayne, as referenced above) I posted it in honor of the creator, and I think most do that. I’d consider it an even bigger honor to actually have that person be here and interacting, and expect them to want to take ownership.