143 replies to this topic

[FIMBLE]

Hi Jan
What are we being scored against?
Whats the criteria?
I was +1 now i am neutral, i have not offended anyone or given bad advise to anyone.
Yes i am annoyed!
Nic

[Jan Zonjee]

FIMBLE, on 17 October 2009, 15:56, said:

What are we being scored against?

There are no guidelines for that as far as I know. I suppose it is up to the member who votes your posts up or down. From what I could find on the IP-Board forums (most is closed off for guests) it works off posts that have rated by other members.

Quote

I was +1 now i am neutral, i have not offended anyone or given bad advise to anyone.
Yes i am annoyed!

As far as I know there is no record who votes for whom and how so we'll have to live with it for the time being

Edited by Jan Zonjee, 17 October 2009, 16:18.

[Jack_mcs]

How is the reputation option enabled?

Does anyone know what the "has not set their status" means in the profile?

[FIMBLE]

Hi Jack

Quote

Does anyone know what the "has not set their status" means in the profile?

Its like the Facebook thing, where you put a bit of text that appears on the forum

Quote

How is the reputation option enabled?

Not by choice, its a default forum setting i guess
Nic

[Jan Zonjee]

Jack_mcs, on 17 October 2009, 16:18, said:

How is the reputation option enabled?

Looks like it depends on votes up or down on posts you made and other members rated (just tried it with a post of Nic and it went up 1).

Quote

Does anyone know what the "has not set their status" means in the profile?

That you didn't type something in the What's on your mind input box on the front page?

Edited by Jan Zonjee, 17 October 2009, 16:26.

[FIMBLE]

Thanks Jan!
Would rather you just removed it all together though [img]http://forums.oscommerce.com/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Jan Zonjee]

FIMBLE, on 17 October 2009, 16:30, said:

Would rather you just removed it all together though

But I can't

Perhaps it can be disabled or enabled but only Harald will be able to do that.

[Jack_mcs]

Quote

Its like the Facebook thing, where you put a bit of text that appears on the forum

Ahh, thanks.

Looks like it depends on votes up or down on posts you made and other members rated (just tried it with a post of Nic and it went up 1).

Looks like a chicken/egg scenario for me since the option to vote doesn't show for me. But I think I agree with Nic, it is, seemingly, so arbitray that it doesn't serve much purpose.

[Jan Zonjee]

Jack_mcs, on 17 October 2009, 16:38, said:

Looks like a chicken/egg scenario for me since the option to vote doesn't show for me.

I notice you can't vote on your own posts but in the bottom right corner of a post, right above the MultiQuote icon there should be a green + and red - button with a number. There is where the vote up or down sits (for me at least). That seems to translate in reputation points. I don't know where the levels are and what levels there are (neutral is one obviously).

So far it is pretty arbitrary but when more people start using it it might be useful.

I'm not much in these social network thingies like Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Hyves (some Dutch equivalent of Facebook I believe) so it is not something for me anyway (probably getting too old and grumpy for that kind of stuff )

[spooks]

Since the score don't appear except in your profile its pretty meaningless any way.

I was wondering, when u ban someone, will thier votes be negated? [img]http://forums.oscommerce.com/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif[/img]



PS Is the ant-spam any better on this software?

[Jan Zonjee]

spooks, on 17 October 2009, 16:58, said:

I was wondering, when u ban someone, will thier votes be negated?

At the moment I can only flag users as spammers which basically does the same thing (they can't post or PM anymore) but I don't think it does something with their votes or reputation.
Just noticed someone in the member list who was flagged as a spammer with a reputation of -1....

Quote

PS Is the ant-spam any better on this software?

I assume it's the same as the previous versions although Harald enabled something recently that adds a kind of reputation to someone who becomes a member. If he/she has been flagged as a spammer elsewhere on an IP-Board he/she can be put in the banned group right away without forum moderator or admin intervenience.
That sounded useful...

[Jack_mcs]

Jan Zonjee, on 17 October 2009, 16:47, said:

I notice you can't vote on your own posts but in the bottom right corner of a post, right above the MultiQuote icon there should be a green + and red - button with a number. There is where the vote up or down sits (for me at least). That seems to translate in reputation points. I don't know where the levels are and what levels there are (neutral is one obviously).

Yes, I see the + & - in everyone elses posts but not in mine. Are they disabled for the poster? Do you see them in my post? In yours?

[Jan Zonjee]

Jack_mcs, on 17 October 2009, 17:32, said:

Yes, I see the + & - in everyone elses posts but not in mine. Are they disabled for the poster? Do you see them in my post? In yours?

Yes, I see them in your post, but not in mine (and for you it is vice versa). It makes sense that the poster can not vote for his own post. Didn't we have that star rating on posts where the poster could rate his own post in the previous version? Wasn't very much used as far as I can remember.

Edited by Jan Zonjee, 17 October 2009, 17:41.

[Jack_mcs]

Jan Zonjee, on 17 October 2009, 17:40, said:

Yes, I see them in your post, but not in mine (and for you it is vice versa). It makes sense that the poster can not vote for his own post. Didn't we have that star rating on posts where the poster could rate his own post in the previous version? Wasn't very much used as far as I can remember.

Ahh, OK. I think the star rating worked after a few thousand votes, which is what you alluded to previously. So maybe in six months, or so, this rating will begin to have more of a meaning when a better average can be seen. It could be a little dangerous initially though if only those upset with a poster, or the kids just playing, decide to vote negatively. Seasoned posters probably won't pay much attention to the rating but new posters might not know the difference.

[Harald Ponce de Leon]

Hi All..

The voting system should be used to mark forum postings (mainly replies) as either positive or negative, in the sense that a helpful posting would be marked positive and a bad posting (eg, "search google") be marked negative.

This type of system can be used to increase the quality of postings made on the forum, and shows a further level of trust worthiness in addition to number of posts and join date.

It is also possible to filter a topic based on the number of votes a posting receives (through the option "Currently viewing all posts. Change threshold?"), so the bad postings can be ignored/hidden.

A limit of 30 positive and 30 negative votes is provided on a daily basis. It is not possible to vote on a posting made by ones self. Postings receiving over 50 positive votes are highlighted.

Lets see how this turns out :-)

Kind regards

[FIMBLE]

Harald Ponce de Leon, on 17 October 2009, 20:13, said:

Hi All..

The voting system should be used to mark forum postings (mainly replies) as either positive or negative, in the sense that a helpful posting would be marked positive and a bad posting (eg, "search google") be marked negative.

This type of system can be used to increase the quality of postings made on the forum, and shows a further level of trust worthiness in addition to number of posts and join date.

It is also possible to filter a topic based on the number of votes a posting receives (through the option "Currently viewing all posts. Change threshold?"), so the bad postings can be ignored/hidden.

A limit of 30 positive and 30 negative votes is provided on a daily basis. It is not possible to vote on a posting made by ones self. Postings receiving over 50 positive votes are highlighted.

Lets see how this turns out :-)

Kind regards

Harald

Some of the people posting on the forum are not happy until you have not only given a complete and total answer, but have visited them to feed their cats and walk the dog.



When we do not give the exact and precise answer to a post the disgruntled originator then bangs a minus in, not because of the answer but because they did not get the answer to the "general how do i" post we usually respond with a search the forum answer

Now to be an unanswered post because no-one will bother answering in case they have a "bad mark" against them. If it’s a mark against the actual post then fair enough i guess, but it translates to the actual person posting so its a score against the person posting. Most people only do this when they feel they have a bad service, 90% of the people here can’t even say a thank you, let alone give you a Green for Go.
I do not see the benefit of this grading system, if a poster was so bad then they would not be around here long anyhow.

There is one member who has given almost 3,000 posts, he has a -1 does this mean his answers are not to be trusted now?

Regards

Nic

[Harald Ponce de Leon]

Hi Nic..

FIMBLE, on 17 October 2009, 20:39, said:

There is one member who has given almost 3,000 posts, he has a -1 does this mean his answers are not to be trusted now?

Ofcourse not - the voting system is new and was not around for the first 2999 postings that member has made. I am sure during this time if this voting system was in place that they would also have scored positive votings. If you come across a post that you think has been wrongly voted on, use one of your own votes to correct the scoring. This can obviously go both ways.

Time is needed to see how useful such a voting system can be.

Kind regards,

[kymation]

Jack_mcs, on 17 October 2009, 16:18, said:

<snip>
Does anyone know what the "has not set their status" means in the profile?

I don't know what it means, but I can set it to any text string that I want. So until I figure out a good use for it, it's set to something silly.

Regards
Jim

[GemRock]

re each member's number of posts: i would like to see something more intelligent that could deduct posts that are asking questions/helps, so that only the posts that answer questions count. example: someone posts/asks 1000 questions but could never answer or never be able to answer any questions, as compared with someone who answers 1000 questions but never asks for help or asks any questions. i know this example is a bit extreme but hope you got the idea.
Ken

[GemRock]

Quote

Does anyone know what the "has not set their status" means in the profile?

well, it could be anything, eg, you could fill in something like single, married, in a relationship, breaking up, in 'civil partnership' etc if you like
Ken