Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,577 Year: 4,834/9,624 Month: 182/427 Week: 95/85 Day: 0/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Quick Questions, Short Answers - No Debate
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 4001
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 4.8


(2)
Message 241 of 653 (645901)
12-31-2011 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 239 by nwr
12-31-2011 9:25 AM


Re: Ratings Still Suck
nwr writes:
Nobody is taking the ratings seriously, as best I can tell. But the cheers/jeers are sometimes entertaining.
I agree that the cheers/jeers can be entertaining, and I confess I feel gratified when a substantial number of people award cheers to one of my posts. Conversely, I'm a bit annoyed when I observe some members jeering posts merely because they fundamentally disagree with the jeered members' beliefs, rather than because the post is badly reasoned, poorly argued, off-topic or offensive.
Given the existence of a rating system, I'd like it to reflect the real world more closely: the weight we give to someone's applause when they applaud everything is slight; the credence we lend to the sourpuss who boos every note is close to nil.
So I'd like the impact of a member's jeer or cheer to reflect their overall behavior. If the King of Jeers (you know who you are ) jeers my post, the impact of that jeer should reflect the fact that the King jeers hundreds of posts per month.
Likewise, a cheer from the partisan who cheers my post because he cheers everything from his camp, however trivial or offensive, shouldn't give me much of a bump compared to the more judicious member who awards cheers as though nominating a POTM.
In the real world, the social value of our judgments reflects how and how often we dispense them. A better rating system would do that, too. Perhaps the algorithm that calculates a rating based on a defined period of time could also calculate the value of a cheer or jeer based on how many the rater has already clicked during the same period.
It would also be entertaining to view each member's cheer/jeer count, perhaps in the public section of the profile.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by nwr, posted 12-31-2011 9:25 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Admin, posted 12-31-2011 4:41 PM Omnivorous has replied
 Message 247 by mike the wiz, posted 01-06-2012 8:20 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 242 of 653 (645904)
12-31-2011 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Granny Magda
12-31-2011 8:53 AM


Re: Ratings Still Suck
GM writes:
After all, they're under enough pressure just being wrong about everything. I know that if I was on a board where every creationist had a rating from 7 - 10 whilst every evolutionist languished on a 1 - 3 rating....
The bottom line, Granny, is that ratings reflect that the majority on creationist boards figure evolutionists are just being wrong about everything and vise versa for the majority on evolutionist boards.
A message may be well constructed grammatically and well articulated, yet so illogical and senseless that a negative rating is deserved, regardless of ideology. Of course, that gets back to what is regarded as illogical and senseless.
I welcome a low rating, having the minority ideological views on about everything here at EvC. I would be concerned if opinions would be highly rated by the majority of folks having much different views than those I ascribe to.
For that reason, ratings are rarely objective.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Granny Magda, posted 12-31-2011 8:53 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13081
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 243 of 653 (645919)
12-31-2011 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by Omnivorous
12-31-2011 1:21 PM


Re: Ratings Still Suck
I like these ideas. I'll keep them in mind when I think about changes the next time I remodel the rating system.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Omnivorous, posted 12-31-2011 1:21 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Omnivorous, posted 01-01-2012 12:35 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied
 Message 246 by RAZD, posted 01-01-2012 11:32 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 4001
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 244 of 653 (645958)
01-01-2012 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by Admin
12-31-2011 4:41 PM


Re: Ratings Still Suck
Thank you, sir.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Admin, posted 12-31-2011 4:41 PM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 245 of 653 (645964)
01-01-2012 1:01 AM


There should be no rating system and only + for a post if you like it.

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1483 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 246 of 653 (645985)
01-01-2012 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by Admin
12-31-2011 4:41 PM


Re: Ratings Still Suck
Hi percy,
I agree with Chuck that there should only be a mark for good posts - particularly if you want to key it to post of the month selections (would you need more than 1?)
If you are going to go +/-, then there should be some way to normalize the results for the numbers of people of the + and - persuasions.
I would think that the default and average would be 5 and then skew the below 5 to go from 1 to 5 and the above 5 to go from 5 to 10.
Someone with no cheers or jeers should be a 5.
It would also be interesting to be able to click on a members rating and see a link to the most cheered and most jeered posts.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Admin, posted 12-31-2011 4:41 PM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4755
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


(3)
Message 247 of 653 (646694)
01-06-2012 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 241 by Omnivorous
12-31-2011 1:21 PM


Re: Ratings Still Suck
Your post was excellent this time, I will say that, sir!
Mainly because of the original ideas, very sophisticated! (though might be hard to employ.)
The rating-system as it is, sadly, just seems to shame the Christian with strong biblical views.
You might say, "oh - poor persecuted mike", but that's not my point, we should be able to award posts that don't consist of ad hominem attacks, and they shouldn't be allowed to be jeered.
There are people on EvC that never insult me, no matter how much I disagree with them.
On a board like this, this sytem only shows majority-opinion, most of the clicks, could be defined thus;
Negative = I hate mikey, and everything he stands for, and I disagree with him all the time.
Neutral = when mikey doesn't say anything with the term, "evolution" or "atheist" in it.
Positive= when mikey becomes an evolutionist.
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Omnivorous, posted 12-31-2011 1:21 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 936 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 248 of 653 (648198)
01-13-2012 8:40 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by Admin
12-29-2011 8:33 AM


Member Ratings
Just a quick suggestion regarding the rating system. I have noticed that some people just go down the posts in a thread and, (or at least it appears) they cheer those posts they agree with and jeer those they disagree with regardless of quality of content. It ends up that creationists have a low score and evolutionists have a high score. I am sure that is not what you intend for the rating system.
What I suggest is only being able to rate a post that you actively participate in. In other words, unless you respond to a post or a post is a response to you, you can not rate it. This may help the ratings to better reflect the quality of a member's posts.
Perhaps a "like" button in addition to the rating button would allow non-participants to acknowledge a good reply without actually participating, but it would not affect the member rating.
Just a thought
HBD

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Admin, posted 12-29-2011 8:33 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by nwr, posted 01-13-2012 9:27 PM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied
 Message 250 by Buzsaw, posted 01-13-2012 10:01 PM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied
 Message 251 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2012 10:15 PM herebedragons has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6419
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.5


(1)
Message 249 of 653 (648203)
01-13-2012 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by herebedragons
01-13-2012 8:40 PM


Re: Member Ratings
What I suggest is only being able to rate a post that you actively participate in. In other words, unless you respond to a post or a post is a response to you, you can not rate it.
I don't agree with that.
I rarely rate. But if I see a post that is total bullshit and way off topic, I should not have to reply to it in order to be able to jeer.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by herebedragons, posted 01-13-2012 8:40 PM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 250 of 653 (648205)
01-13-2012 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by herebedragons
01-13-2012 8:40 PM


Re: Member Ratings
herebedragons writes:
Just a quick suggestion regarding the rating system. I have noticed that some people just go down the posts in a thread and, (or at least it appears) they cheer those posts they agree with and jeer those they disagree with regardless of quality of content. It ends up that creationists have a low score and evolutionists have a high score. I am sure that is not what you intend for the rating system.
What I suggest is only being able to rate a post that you actively participate in. In other words, unless you respond to a post or a post is a response to you, you can not rate it. This may help the ratings to better reflect the quality of a member's posts.
Perhaps a "like" button in addition to the rating button would allow non-participants to acknowledge a good reply without actually participating, but it would not affect the member rating.
Just a thought
The problem with that is that you limit the raters to the same-oles, some of who are trollish. It should be open to all members.
Perhaps it would be good if there was some way for guests to rate. There would have to be a way to eliminate members not logged in.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Restructure sentence

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by herebedragons, posted 01-13-2012 8:40 PM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1483 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 251 of 653 (648206)
01-13-2012 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by herebedragons
01-13-2012 8:40 PM


Re: Member Ratings. what about comment rating?
Hi herebedragons,
I have noticed that some people just go down the posts in a thread and, (or at least it appears) they cheer those posts they agree with and jeer those they disagree with regardless of quality of content.
I see any way for a rating system to avoid being a popularity vote.
Perhaps a "like" button in addition ...
It used to be like\dislike, and still ended up being a popularity vote.
I am sure that is not what you intend for the rating system.
As I understand it, the rating system is an attempt to identify good quality posts for the Post of the Month thread.
Initially (iirc) it was a numbered scale. This too became a popularity vote.
Personally I think only "cheer" "like" or "+" should be allowed if the intent is to identify good posts. Perhaps it should be labeled "well written" ...
Another kick that may be cool but difficult to implement would be a highlight and "like" the highlighted quote, then when the "well written" button is hovered it would either pop out the section or highlight it.
It ends up that creationists have a low score and evolutionists have a high score.
Only because there are more evolutionists that use the rating system than creationists. I've been on other boards and the ratings and distribution of people were reversed.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by herebedragons, posted 01-13-2012 8:40 PM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Coyote, posted 01-13-2012 10:30 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 253 by herebedragons, posted 01-14-2012 7:59 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 258 by Admin, posted 01-14-2012 8:52 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2184 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 252 of 653 (648208)
01-13-2012 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by RAZD
01-13-2012 10:15 PM


Re: Member Ratings. what about comment rating?
I suggested long ago three ratings:
Post of the day
Post of the week
Post of the month
That way there are no negative ratings, just good, better and best.
The suggestion was ignored of course...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2012 10:15 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by herebedragons, posted 01-14-2012 8:02 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 255 by Buzsaw, posted 01-14-2012 8:12 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 257 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2012 8:43 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 259 by Admin, posted 01-14-2012 8:56 AM Coyote has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 936 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 253 of 653 (648278)
01-14-2012 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by RAZD
01-13-2012 10:15 PM


Re: Member Ratings. what about comment rating?
As I understand it, the rating system is an attempt to identify good quality posts for the Post of the Month thread.
And members who consistently make good, thoughtful and considerate posts. At least, as I see the purpose.
I (don't) see any way for a rating system to avoid being a popularity vote
Your probably right. I kinda like Coyote's suggestion in [MSG=252]. That way you wouldn't have indiscriminate jeering. Good, Better, Best. It could still be used as a popularity contest though.
I've been on other boards and the ratings and distribution of people were reversed.
I am sure that's true. I was just kinda thinking that it would be nice to look at a members rating and have an idea of whether it would be worthwhile to enter into a debate with them or not; rather than whether they are creationist or evolutionist. But I guess it doesn't really take too long to figure that out by just responding to a few posts.
HBD
Edited by herebedragons, : corrected link
Edited by herebedragons, : corrected link again!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2012 10:15 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Buzsaw, posted 01-14-2012 8:18 AM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied
 Message 261 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2012 9:40 AM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied
 Message 262 by NoNukes, posted 01-14-2012 12:30 PM herebedragons has seen this message but not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 936 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 254 of 653 (648279)
01-14-2012 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by Coyote
01-13-2012 10:30 PM


Re: Member Ratings. what about comment rating?
Actually, I like that idea.
Maybe not "Post of the ..." that would imply only voting for one post? Maybe just good, better, best?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Coyote, posted 01-13-2012 10:30 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 255 of 653 (648283)
01-14-2012 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by Coyote
01-13-2012 10:30 PM


Re: Member Ratings. what about comment rating?
Coyote writes:
I suggested long ago three ratings:
Post of the day
Post of the week
Post of the month
That way there are no negative ratings, just good, better and best.
The suggestion was ignored of course...
Likely the reason it was ignored is that it wouldn't fix the problem. Take a survey of monthly POMs. How many favor minority members?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Coyote, posted 01-13-2012 10:30 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024