 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3  Previous Next
|
|
the Rating System |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,436 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet: Quote:
It surprises me people were able to answer the poll, because I have no clue what it's about. Reputation, Contributions, Movie Ratings...  I guess then you could vote for the option "Rating System? huh"  | | | Achim [諾亞信； Ya-Shin//Nuo], a German in Taiwan.
Registered: May 29, 2000 (at InterVocative) |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 347 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting goblinsdoitall: Quote:
But still I'd prefer a possibility to comment on a negative vote, it would even give the moderators a hint whether it's justified or not. For the user that gets the negative mark it still can be anonymous but with the comment. That is a valid point ...  | | | | Antec Nine Hundred case, 4GB A-Data DDR2 800 RAM, Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 Conroe 2.66GHz, ASUS P5K-E/WIFI-AP MB, XFX GeForce 8600GT XXX 256MB 128-bit GDDR3 video card, ZALMAN CNPS9500 AT 2 Ball CPU Cooling Fan/Heatsink, Seagate Barracuda 320GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s HDD, Zerodba 620W PSU, LITE-ON 20X DVD±R DVD with LightScribe SATA, Samsung CDDVDW SH-S203B SATA, Hanns-G HH281 28" monitor, Kodak ESP3250 printer, Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 speakers, Windows 7 Professional |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 2,692 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting kahless: Quote:
Quoting DJ Doena:
Quote:
Quoting kahless:
Quote:
I don't think that this is a valid reason. Ken said, that he will monitor vendettas and takes action if necessary 
I keep my position: anonymity makes it much easier to give unjustified negative votes. Otherwise the voters would think twice to give negatives.
But as you said, Ken will monitor these. He who gets unjustified votes can complain to him. If he actually sees who voted on him, he could feel compelled to take matters into his own hand, which in turn would mean more work for Ken, because instead of having one unjustified votes he now has two.
O.k. DJ Doena, you have a point. But I know from my personal experience, that an unjustified negative wasn't removed. Complaint was futile! I'm pretty sure that some other users have similar experiences. I can understand this, because Ken cannot permanently monitor for this.
Last but not least it's a kind of philosophical question if a reputation system can substitute a moderator And I'll repeat yet again something which has been said many times "A single negative vote doesn't affect your rating." And he tried to get moderators. And I assume that he couldn't get enough so this system is to try and make up for that by working automatically - so that if a single post garners a number of negative votes that implies that action can be taken automatically (and just in case - he monitors these -ve votes). | | | | Paul |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,692 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting goblinsdoitall: Quote:
But still I'd prefer a possibility to comment on a negative vote, it would even give the moderators a hint whether it's justified or not. For the user that gets the negative mark it still can be anonymous but with the comment. that would be fine. It would certainly be enlightening to see any comment on the negative votes I've received. | | | | Paul |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting pauls42: Quote:
Quoting goblinsdoitall:
Quote:
But still I'd prefer a possibility to comment on a negative vote, it would even give the moderators a hint whether it's justified or not. For the user that gets the negative mark it still can be anonymous but with the comment.
that would be fine. It would certainly be enlightening to see any comment on the negative votes I've received. I agree, I think the rating system should be kept anonymous, but being able to leave a comment for a negative vote should be mandatory, as with contribution votes. I've received one negative to date and still I've no idea why! |
| | Registered: April 8, 2007 | | Posts: 1,057 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hi Guys,
In my opinion the star system is an abysmal failure, in that it's tries to accomplish what a moderator would via a voting system. I would challenge anyone who thinks this system works to:
1. Briefly describe what he/she thinks the stars program was designed for.
2. Sight an example of how giving stars accomplished #1
On my part I only give good stars, I refuse to give bad stars. If it's bad enough a moderator or admin should take action. Not have a vote, to try an dissuade future behavior. I will give a good star for any reason that somehow enriches me for reading the post, or echoes my sentiments.
IMO Some steps toward Modification:
Qualities to look for in a mod:
Length of time on this board, hours & posts
Clear & concise understanding of english
Demonstrates a sense of fairness
Other desirable qualities????
From the above pool of potential candidates.
Establish a senior status, which has some powers of a moderator.
Graduates of the senior program become mod's.
What's very important to the home grown mod program, is strong leadership from Ken & Geri. Like Gen. Patton. Anything leadership puts out that can be read, one way or the other is doomed to fail.
It's not a matter of looking at the current population, then abstracting who would be a good mod. It's who has the basic desirable qualities, & mold them into what you want. From boot camp come generals.
Finally it would be very enlightening to know the statistics of the stars program, & not the names that go with them.
Take Care
Rico | | | If I felt any better I'd be sick!
Envy is mental theft. If you covet another mans possessions, then you should be willing to take on his responsibilities, heartaches, and troubles, along with his money. D. Koontz |
| | Registered: March 21, 2007 |  Posts: 171 |
| | Posted: | | | | It stops super nasty postings. It has accomplished this much at the very least. | | | | Graham |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rico: Quote:
1. Briefly describe what he/she thinks the stars program was designed for.
2. Sight an example of how giving stars accomplished #1 I think it was designed to encourage helpful posts and to discourage insulting posts. I think giving positive feedback has encouraged people to make positive helpful posts, contributions, and vote comments. I've seen a big increase in those; haven't you? On the flip side, I think negative feedback has caused a big drop in insults in forums posts, contribution notes and vote comments. I have personally changed my posting habits to avoid receiving such feedback and I've also been insulted a whole lot less. I've received a stray negative vote (for posting the global warming video) but it didn't have an overall affect on my rating as far as I can tell. Quote:
On my part I only give good stars, I refuse to give bad stars. If it's bad enough a moderator or admin should take action. I think the point is that they either don't want to police the forums or they'd rather spend their time on other aspects of DVD Profiler (which I hope is the case). I understand you want to keep positive, but I think the threat of a negative vote (or actual negative votes) are what steers things positive now. If everyone adopted your no-negative policy, then the threat would disappear and the level of insults would return to what it was. The people who give negative votes, overall, are not the negative people. The negative people, in general, are those making negative posts. The negative votes discourage this behavior and point people back to posting positively. On average, I think the system has cleaned up the forums, the contribution notes and the vote comments. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: April 8, 2007 | | Posts: 1,057 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hi Guys, Graham - Do you have an example? James - Well said! Quote:
I think giving positive feedback has encouraged people to make positive helpful posts, contributions, and vote comments. Yes people will strive to achieve 'good stars', but bad behavior is not changed by giving bad stars. I joined this forum pre-stars, & IMHO the nasty flaming, well just did not exist. Granted I did not read all the posts. Quote:
I think the point is that they either don't want to police the forums or they'd rather spend their time on other aspects of DVD Profiler (which I hope is the case). Agreed, kind of silly waste having that kind of talent policing a few bad posters. Allow moderators to police the boards. I'm surprised neither of you commented on that portion of my post. Quote:
I think the threat of a negative vote (or actual negative votes) are what steers things positive now. Your perception is backed by feelings not examples. Generally nice people like yourself, would never behave (post) in a fashion warranting, a negative star. I doubt seriously that threat of a negative star, will change, the small number of 'flame throwers' attitude to life and posting. Quote:
If everyone adopted your no-negative policy, then the threat would disappear and the level of insults would return to what it was. I don't think the level of insults was that bad, what was occurring was by very few individuals. Should everyone adopt my policy 'no negative stars' the admins would be receiving PM's on bad behavior. This is leading right back to mod's. We have super sunday coming up should we allow the fans in the stadium to decide plays instead of the referee's, via a voting system? The dirty football player will he play, according to the rules if the fans give him negative votes? Of course not, seems rather silly to even consider, but thats what I see with the negative star voting system. Quote:
On average, I think the system has cleaned up the forums, the contribution notes and the vote comments.
Some statistics (no names) could back that quote up. Take Care Rico | | | If I felt any better I'd be sick!
Envy is mental theft. If you covet another mans possessions, then you should be willing to take on his responsibilities, heartaches, and troubles, along with his money. D. Koontz |
| | Registered: April 4, 2007 |  Posts: 141 |
| | Posted: | | | | Well, from a personal point-of-view, I think there has been a definite drop in attacks in the forums. Although as someone said earlier in the discussion, if you need around 25 poisitive votes to get a star, you might need as many negative votes to get a bad star. So far I haven't seen anyone with one, so I'm assuming no-one has actually got to that point yet. The analogy with the EBay system is apt, as I know I'm wary of buying or selling to someone who has even a single negative, even if they have hundreds of positives. I like this system where you don't know how many people have exactly. Whilst it doesn't make me think 'wow this person is good', I'm more inclined to read their posts, to see what they think. And on the global warming post ... I found it very interesting  Cheers |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rico: Quote:
bad behavior is not changed by giving bad stars. How do you know? Quoting Rico: Quote:
I joined this forum pre-stars, & IMHO the nasty flaming, well just did not exist. Granted I did not read all the posts. Did you frequent the contributions forum? That's where most of it was. Quote:
Allow moderators to police the boards. I'm surprised neither of you commented on that portion of my post. For whatever reason, they chose not to go with moderators. They solicited volunteers and I know that there were volunteers, but nothing came of it. I think that there were objections that whomever was chosen would be seen as partial to their own viewpoints, so they went with an anonymous system. But who knows why they went with the reputation system. I don't know. Quote:
Your perception is backed by feelings not examples. I'm reluctant to list examples because it could breathe life into old arguments. Quote:
Generally nice people like yourself, would never behave (post) in a fashion warranting, a negative star. I have posted in a negative fashion occasionally in the past when there were fights. With the new system, I'm no longer attacked as I was before; therefore, I'm not attacking either. Quote:
I doubt seriously that threat of a negative star, will change, the small number of 'flame throwers' attitude to life and posting. Well, something has muted those who used to attack me. I'll leave it at that. Quote:
I don't think the level of insults was that bad, what was occurring was by very few individuals. It was "that bad" to me.  Quote:
Should everyone adopt my policy 'no negative stars' the admins would be receiving PM's on bad behavior. This is leading right back to mod's. I think the new system is to help reduce the number of PM's they receive on these kinds of subjects. Quote:
We have super sunday coming up should we allow the fans in the stadium to decide plays instead of the referee's, via a voting system? The dirty football player will he play, according to the rules if the fans give him negative votes? Of course not, seems rather silly to even consider, but thats what I see with the negative star voting system. We're policing ourselves. We're not policing game players. Quote:
Quote:
On average, I think the system has cleaned up the forums, the contribution notes and the vote comments. Some statistics (no names) could back that quote up. How would I quantify the level of insults from before and after the system was implemented? I can only report anecdotally that since the implementation, I haven't been personally insulted by a contribution note (I have in the past), I haven't been personally insulted by a vote comment (I have in the past), and the number of negative feedback votes that I've given seem to have declined since the implementation. That indicates that for my personal experience here, things have improved. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 820 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TommyG: Quote:
So, it's been going for a while, thought it was time to put up a poll and see what the reaction to the system has been....
And, what type of things do people get positives/nagatives for? I'm still waiting to get one either way
Cheers
Tom Thanks for the poll Tom. My experience to date has been positive. I think that the general tone of the forums has improved. We are still in the fledgling stage and more tuning will be required IMHO. It seems apparent that the purpose of the system is to effect cultural change. This takes time and requires constant reinforcement. This could be achieved with a team of moderators but would be labour intensive. I am facinated to see that the largely automatic system based on end-user input appears to be achieving what would normally take a team of moderators to achieve. I have personally noticed a drop off in the number of votes being cast which should probably be expected. I suspect that this will mean that the thresholds for stars may need to be reset. At the current rate that my positive votes in the last 30 days are disappearing from the system versus the number of new votes coming in, I predict that I may be the first to actually lose a star. Some further food for thought: There are users from this forum all over the world;On balance, I think that the system favours users from the US. This is because that they have the greatest numbers and will be on the forums when other foreign users and I are asleep. Therefore they will have more opportunities to participate positively at times when users are active; andI personally would like to see the reputation system used more for good profile contributions. | | | | Last edited: by Telecine |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 1,982 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TommyG: Quote:
Although as someone said earlier in the discussion, if you need around 25 poisitive votes to get a star, you might need as many negative votes to get a bad star. So far I haven't seen anyone with one, so I'm assuming no-one has actually got to that point yet. I don't think that a bad star appear in the public reputation, not 100% sure of that but I think that it was mentions in the old topic. |
| | Registered: March 28, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,299 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting AESP_pres: Quote:
I don't think that a bad star appear in the public reputation, not 100% sure of that but I think that it was mentions in the old topic. I believe you are correct. If you click on the star in the upper-right corner of the screen, you'll see that it specifically points out that "positive ratings will display with your user information on your forum posts" while saying nothing about negative ratings. KM | | | Tags, tags, bo bags, banana fana fo fags, mi my mo mags, TAGS!
Dolly's not alone. You can also clone profiles.
You've got questions? You've got answers? Take the DVD Profiler Wiki for a spin. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'm looking at this poll -- there are three spots to vote "in favor" of how the system is working, but two to express displeasure, and two neutrals.
There are 10 votes on "I love it".
There are 20 votes on "I like it".
There are 11 votes on "It's OK".
There are 8 votes on "Take it or leave it".
There are 5 votes on "Rating System? huh".
There are 2 votes on "Not a great fan".
There are 2 votes on "HATE it".
... for a total of 58 votes.
Of those 58, 41 find the system OK or better, 13 are neutral or don't acknowledge it, and 4 dislike it.
Again there are 50% more ways of saying OK or better than expressing disliking for the system. If we toss 1/3 of the positive votes, there are still 27 votes approving the system (out of 44).
44 "plus" votes.
4 "negative" votes.
13 "non-committal" votes.
70.69% of 58 votes are positive; 61.14% of 44 votes are positive.
6.9% of 58 votes are negative; 9.09% of 44 votes are negative.
22.41% of 58 votes are neutral; 29.55% of 44 votes are neutral.
More than two-thirds of the total votes are in favor of the system, where less than 10% are opposed to it.
So far. | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,692 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rico: Quote:
Hi Guys,
In my opinion the star system is an abysmal failure, in that it's tries to accomplish what a moderator would via a voting system. I would challenge anyone who thinks this system works to:
1. Briefly describe what he/she thinks the stars program was designed for.
2. Sight an example of how giving stars accomplished #1
On my part I only give good stars, I refuse to give bad stars. If it's bad enough a moderator or admin should take action. Not have a vote, to try an dissuade future behavior. I will give a good star for any reason that somehow enriches me for reading the post, or echoes my sentiments.
in my opinion it's been a resounding success. What it was designed to do - Reward positive contributions to the forums. Provide a meams of calming the forums to everyone the opportunity to express their opinion. Has it done this - yes. I see those who have got some rewards and its clear that they do make generally positive posts. has it calmed the forums - again Yes IMHO. The threads in the contribution forum were sometimes very unpleasant to view. | | | | Paul |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |