- Reaction score
- 184
- Points
- 1,210
Hi Willy,
Thanks for the feedback. (And you're not out of line...all feedback is good, it helps form a more complete picture.) It was certainly not a "clear cut" decision to enable ratings. There are really two questions to look at with regards to the rating system:
1. Will people use the system to effectively rate the contributions (or detractions) of other users here?
While my hope is that it will be strictly used to encourage contribution and discourage trolling, I have no illusions that it will also be used as a personal vendetta device. That's unfortunate, but there's little we can do about it short of disabling ratings all together. (As a matter of principle, I hate to let the "few abusers" force the rest of us to get along with one less feature...)
In the old system, you could rate a user from 1-5 only once, and had to live with that. The new system allows you to rate a user multiple times (with a one hour mandatory "cooling off" period in between). There are pros and cons to that: if someone is able to change their ways (for better or worse) you're no longer forced to live with your initial assessment of the user.
My rule of thumb: Whenever I see a post that's informative, useful, entertaining, etc I give the poster a positive rating. When I see someone dishing out personal attacks or taking a thread off topic, they get a negative. I don't (consciously) let personal opinions come into play.
As a mitigating factor, you must have at least 25 posts here before you can rate someone else. That won't prevent abuse, but it'll require that you've been here for a while before you can start throwing punches. I give out 3-4 positive ratings for every negative, though I'm not sure if that's a function of the posts I read or a subconscious decision to stay positive.
2. What is the impact of a user's rating?
This is key. Ratings are used by the staff here to judge a user's standing, but only in part. That is, nobody's going to stay or inflict punitive action based on ratings. It's always based on a user's specific actions. Having said that, a strong trend in one direction or the other can help us form a clearer picture of a user's general standing. We're aware that ratings may be skewed by mudslinging and that it may turn into a popularity contest, and so we weigh it accordingly.
How others interpret a user's ratings is up for debate, but you can assume they put a bit more stock into the facts posted by someone with a positive trend, and look with a bit more skepticism on those from someone with a negative trend.
The danger in dropping the rating system is that there's no way for the general population to reward good behaviour and punish bad. I'm hoping that it will act as an incentive (no matter how small) and nudge people in the "right" direction in terms of forum behaviour.
Feel free to demote me if you disagree.
And to your point about recent posts: You're absolutely right. There have been too many threads degrade into a name calling match. Everone needs to be aware that personal attacks are against forum policy and will not be tolerated. Action will be taken against users who breach the conduct guidelines.
Cheers
Mike
Thanks for the feedback. (And you're not out of line...all feedback is good, it helps form a more complete picture.) It was certainly not a "clear cut" decision to enable ratings. There are really two questions to look at with regards to the rating system:
1. Will people use the system to effectively rate the contributions (or detractions) of other users here?
While my hope is that it will be strictly used to encourage contribution and discourage trolling, I have no illusions that it will also be used as a personal vendetta device. That's unfortunate, but there's little we can do about it short of disabling ratings all together. (As a matter of principle, I hate to let the "few abusers" force the rest of us to get along with one less feature...)
In the old system, you could rate a user from 1-5 only once, and had to live with that. The new system allows you to rate a user multiple times (with a one hour mandatory "cooling off" period in between). There are pros and cons to that: if someone is able to change their ways (for better or worse) you're no longer forced to live with your initial assessment of the user.
My rule of thumb: Whenever I see a post that's informative, useful, entertaining, etc I give the poster a positive rating. When I see someone dishing out personal attacks or taking a thread off topic, they get a negative. I don't (consciously) let personal opinions come into play.
As a mitigating factor, you must have at least 25 posts here before you can rate someone else. That won't prevent abuse, but it'll require that you've been here for a while before you can start throwing punches. I give out 3-4 positive ratings for every negative, though I'm not sure if that's a function of the posts I read or a subconscious decision to stay positive.
2. What is the impact of a user's rating?
This is key. Ratings are used by the staff here to judge a user's standing, but only in part. That is, nobody's going to stay or inflict punitive action based on ratings. It's always based on a user's specific actions. Having said that, a strong trend in one direction or the other can help us form a clearer picture of a user's general standing. We're aware that ratings may be skewed by mudslinging and that it may turn into a popularity contest, and so we weigh it accordingly.
How others interpret a user's ratings is up for debate, but you can assume they put a bit more stock into the facts posted by someone with a positive trend, and look with a bit more skepticism on those from someone with a negative trend.
The danger in dropping the rating system is that there's no way for the general population to reward good behaviour and punish bad. I'm hoping that it will act as an incentive (no matter how small) and nudge people in the "right" direction in terms of forum behaviour.
Feel free to demote me if you disagree.
And to your point about recent posts: You're absolutely right. There have been too many threads degrade into a name calling match. Everone needs to be aware that personal attacks are against forum policy and will not be tolerated. Action will be taken against users who breach the conduct guidelines.
Cheers
Mike
