Dislike for Ranking System
Author
If you look through my posts here you can see that I've never posted anything deragatory or said anything harsh to anyone. But, regardless, I had my score go down into 900 something because I had asked for help in the math forums. As kind as I was, someone had to just lower my score. I never spammed and I never insulted, I never got in anyones way or broke any rules either. Still, someone had to give me a sour vote.
I dont think the ranking system is effective, nor do I think it works right. I have a higher score than 900 right now because I made a spline editor and someone liked it, but when I asked for math help it actually made someone go out of there way to click about saying something negative about me. Why even have help forums if people are going to negativly rank you when you ask for help?
I dont think its fair and I think that only moderators or people trusted with the ability to make sound judgement should have the responsibility to rank others.
Take the ranking system with a hand full of salt. I think it does work, i was in the same boat as you once.
You don't get ranked up when you help for a few reasons:
- The person you helped may be ungreatful for the help.
- The person you helped may not be aware of how to rate someone.
- You may not have helped signifantly, or someone followed your post up with a slight expansion on what you wrote and therefore they got rated.
Conversly though,
- Some people rate up for anything.
Mine went down to 900 or so and now it is well up. Mainly because i have persistantly tried to be helpful.
Don't worry about it. It isn't really a true view of your place on these forums, especially if you are new. To be honest the higher your ranking the more likely you are to get rated up, because someone thinks that 'that person appears to be popular here, i'll rate him too cos what they say is difinitive'.
Take care bud,
ace
You don't get ranked up when you help for a few reasons:
- The person you helped may be ungreatful for the help.
- The person you helped may not be aware of how to rate someone.
- You may not have helped signifantly, or someone followed your post up with a slight expansion on what you wrote and therefore they got rated.
Conversly though,
- Some people rate up for anything.
Mine went down to 900 or so and now it is well up. Mainly because i have persistantly tried to be helpful.
Don't worry about it. It isn't really a true view of your place on these forums, especially if you are new. To be honest the higher your ranking the more likely you are to get rated up, because someone thinks that 'that person appears to be popular here, i'll rate him too cos what they say is difinitive'.
Take care bud,
ace
Quote:Original post by ace_lovegrove
Take the ranking system with a hand full of salt.
A handful? Try a bucket.
You have to understand that the ratings system is fundamentally arbitrary. Anybody can rate you for any reason, with 0 accountability. The number has no meaning whatsoever until you begin to reach extremes, which indicates a lot of people feeling one way or the other about you. The middle range is largely inconsequential; I'd pin it between 800-1100, roughly. You're best off ignoring your rating entirely, because it does nothing but drive you insane about the minor day-to-day variations. "Why did someone rate me down??" It could be because your name has a prime number of letters, for all you know. Just forget about it.
Quote:Original post by Promit
"Why did someone rate me down??" It could be because your name has a prime number of letters, for all you know.
Well you don't have to worry about that, Promit, but if I were SiCrane I'd be getting a little nervous... lol ;)
Quote:Original post by MattMcFarlandNo, if your rating went down to 900, MANY people had to give you a negative vote. Even the highest rated person couldn't drop your score that much by giving you the most negative rating.
[...]I had my score go down into 900 [...]
Still, someone had to give me a sour vote.[...]
Anyways, paying attention to the rating system isn't socially acceptable. Don't let it happen again. =-)
The whole idea behind the rating system is that it is (except in extreme cases) unmoderated - that is, the community as a whole decides what your rating should be. If you were seen by the wrong crowd and your rating dropped to 900, don't worry about it because if you're honestly not annoying (the main thing the ratings judge, though helpfulness comes a close second) then your rating will rise from it's ashes like the noble phoenix. Just watch out for the end of the cycle and don't post while your phoenix is consuming itself =-)
Quote:Original post by mikedoty
Well you don't have to worry about that, Promit, but if I were SiCrane I'd be getting a little nervous... lol ;)
So that's why my rating dropped by two points this week! It's so obvious now!
The rating system works the way demographic surveys do it. You just add together a few hundred votes and take the average.
Sometimes, one or two individuals rate you for something undeserved, but if everyone consistently rate you up, then you must have done something to deserve it. If your rating is always declining, well, you must be doing *something* to piss off people.
As Promit said, it only works for extremes. If your rating drops to 300, it means that you're not a popular person. And it works perfectly for that. If you reach 1800 without being a mod/staff, it means a hell of a lot of people thought you were nice/helpful to have around.
If it swings between 970 and 1020 (You didn't clarify 900-something, but I doubt it was down near 900 straight), no one gives a damn. And you shuldn't either. If you make a few posts worth rating up, then hey, you get another 15 points. If you say a single word out of place in the wrong thread, wham, you lose 80. But life goes on. In the end, your rating will stabilize (when more than 3 people have rated you).
It's not a competition, and you don't win a prize for getting a good rating. So how would it be an improvement to allow moderators only to rate? That way, moderators could tell us all who we're supposed to find helpful? Sounds silly to me. I prefer to make that decision myself.
Sometimes, one or two individuals rate you for something undeserved, but if everyone consistently rate you up, then you must have done something to deserve it. If your rating is always declining, well, you must be doing *something* to piss off people.
As Promit said, it only works for extremes. If your rating drops to 300, it means that you're not a popular person. And it works perfectly for that. If you reach 1800 without being a mod/staff, it means a hell of a lot of people thought you were nice/helpful to have around.
If it swings between 970 and 1020 (You didn't clarify 900-something, but I doubt it was down near 900 straight), no one gives a damn. And you shuldn't either. If you make a few posts worth rating up, then hey, you get another 15 points. If you say a single word out of place in the wrong thread, wham, you lose 80. But life goes on. In the end, your rating will stabilize (when more than 3 people have rated you).
It's not a competition, and you don't win a prize for getting a good rating. So how would it be an improvement to allow moderators only to rate? That way, moderators could tell us all who we're supposed to find helpful? Sounds silly to me. I prefer to make that decision myself.
If everyone here is basically saying that you should ignore the rating system, does this not mean that you agree with the poster? Besides stressing out the people attempting to find help or help others. What else does it do? Tell the people being annoying that they are indeed annoying? Why does no one agree with banishing the ranking system as the poster brings up. I find it wierd that you defend a system that you tell others to ignore/does not work correctly.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement