dBoard 4.0 Release

Well, guess what? There's a new system with "like/dislike" beside the posts, so you could have clicked on a thumb up icon, and activated PD's ratings. I'll do it instead, although I'm indifferent to the smilies, and I'll do it for the other people on this thread who haven't been activated yet, regardless of what they're saying. Could someone please do it for this post, as it's my first since the system came in.I can't comment on the future of the system yet, and how it will work, but congratulations on one thing. It seems that the past ratings will no longer be anonymous. So the people who were receiving lots of "ones" will know where to direct their revenge!The results could be amusing.

Same for me. Also, when I rated three posts above, I had to use "refresh" each time to make it work. It was giving the "error on page" sign.

Still exactly the same problem as Mod. I'm on Explorer 8.I've checked some past posts that I knew to have ratings on, and nothing shows. I can see everyone elses.

Seems fixed. I can see the two ratings on my post further up the page. Well done!

Same for me (also on IE8). For those in the same boat until Percy fixes it, it works if you refresh the page after clicking the icon.

As it would be impossible to pretend that I don't like a post that says it's giving me a "Like" with a capital "L", I've given yours a refreshed Like on IE8 to confirm things.

Aproximately, it would mean that the ratio of "likes" to "dislikes" given on your posts in the last 90 days is 60/40.I say "aproximately" because if an individual member has given you, for example, two likes, it will only count as one. Also, for example, one like and two dislikes from an individual will just count as the balance (one dislike).Percy will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's supposed to be how it works.Your +20 could be the result of, for example, 12 likes and 8 dislikes if those come from 20 different individuals. But it's unlikely to be that simple because of those who have voted on your posts more than once.

The 90 days will give odd and fairly random results for people who haven't posted much during the period. Why not just go with the 500 posts, meaning all posts for newcomers with less than 500?BTW, Moose mentioned his rating, but I can't see it (I can see all others). IE8, again.

That's correct, and it relates to another point under this system. What are we supposed to be aiming for?If I saw myself with something "high", like a +85, and then noticed that you were on +55, what should I think? I might come to the conclusion that Adequate is being more successful at making posts that creationists object to, and that I should be working a bit harder on it!And given the current makeup of the membership, if a creationist finds himself in the + area, should he be pleased or worried?And your bland poster might possibly get 5 "likes" over 90 days (very easy) and no dislikes, giving him a score of 100 instead of 0.Having said that, I don't think anyone much takes it too seriously, and it'll be interesting to see the relative effects of the labeled ratings as compared to the anonymous ones. I think Percy is working on it with a view to future projects, and I'm happy to be a guinea pig for anything he wants to experiment with.

Works fine now. I just tried it by giving the above an optimistic thumbs up.Edited by bluegenes, : No reason given.