Yeah ratings are like some f**** popularity contest at high school. I never understood what purpose they are truly supposed to serve.
Perry Perkins
Angry note on the rating system
Crap, messed up my quote tags, now look at the mess. [sad]
Ah, my mistake then.
By some perhaps, not by all. And it wasn't your 'solution' that was being labeled as foolish, it was posting about ratings in the exact way that is commonly posted, and usually ends up with the OP having a smaller rating. And in anycase, 'protesting' the current rating system could be mistaken as whiny.
Ah, there is that definition as well, which I've overlooked. You said "So is there any part of what you said there something I don't agree with."
Could you rephrase that sentence? Do you mean, 'Is there any part of my post that you don't agree with?' or 'There is a part of your post, I don't agree with'? I'm at a bit of a loss on how to respond.
Ah, my mistake. [smile]
Is that good or bad, in your opinion? In mine, this isn't so good, but then again, it is not the staff or mods that make it taboo, but the users of the site through more bad ratings. This is rather unfortunate, and I wish it wasn't so, but it is so. I think there was only once I rated someone down for posting about their rating, and I've posted in alot of rating threads. I only rated this poster down because he was a complete jerk.(Although not directed at me)
Perhaps, but I question whether it is worth changing the forum software, to try a different rating, when the current rating system does what it is intended to do. If it didn't do what it is intended to do, then it would be broken; and if it is broken, surely the staff, who implemented it in the first place, would continue to alter it until it does work. What you are asking is not for a broken system to be fixed, but rather for a new or altered system to be put into place, to give it more features. (To allow you to see for what you are being rated down for)
Stop posting as AP then! [grin]
Yeah, sorry about the confusion, not sure that got started.(Perhaps it's my fault?)
Actually, the only post I saw you post in the last, oh, twenty minutes or so, you were wrong in what you posted, although it was a minor issue. To your credit, however, you admitted you were wrong, when corrected, and you apologize.
Is this considered being flamed? Perhaps; I always thought being flamed was having about 10 or so people jumping down your throat and heaping insults at you and others who share your view. What this is is a pretty much clean, polite thread, and although you have gotten a few mild insults, no obscenities, and no real insults. People are discussing the topic in a sane manner, and although a few have called you whiny, a fool, accused you of trying to be a martyr, etc... this hardly constitutes a flame. Although, perhaps from your point of view it looks different? In any case, if this is a flame, it's an incredibly mild one.
Well, as a creationist, I find that a complement. [grin] (joking, ofcourse)
Or, people could just be mature and PM those they have a problem with, and quitely resolve it.
...
To hard to expect people to be mature, when all evidence tends to the contrary, eh? But that'd be the ideal solution, in my opinion. Ofcourse, for this to work, those that receive complaints must be willing to give them an honest thought, and not just ignore it.
Really though, I had a horrible rating myself for about half the time I've been at GDnet. It only encouraged me to help out more, and win back the gap. In most cases, I try not to take my rating seriously though, although that doesn't always prove easy. [smile]
Oh, and I almost never judge a post by it's rating. There IS a reason why the rating is at the bottom of a post.(Or, if that is purely coincidental, I now give it that reason)
Judging a poster by his or her rating is as foolish as judging a man by his car.
Quote:Original post by DakeDesuQuote:Original post by Servant of the LordQuote:Original post by DakeDesu
Responding to some previous posts:
I was under the impression that the only reason we had Anonymous Posting was to stop threads from going OT by a certain user posting (maybe some prolithic figure in the game design community).
Out of curiosity, if a well-known game designer didn't want to have his or her name cause distraction online, wouldn't they not name their account after themselves? But that's really not important anyway. What I think Alpha was saying, was that if you post as AP while helping people, they obviously can't rate you up, but when posting in non-lounge forums, those are the only place you have a good chance to be rated up. You are effectively blocking the majority of rate+'s by going anon, while accepting the vast majority of negative ratings when posting in the lounge.
I am still trying to figure out where is says I don't post outside the lounge. Actually I am pretty sure most of my rate- are from outside the lounge. Check out some of the threads in the Business and Scripting Languages forums.
Ah, my mistake then.
Quote:Quote:Original post by Servant of the LordQuote:Amusing. By what logic do you come at to decide you are, in fact, not a fool? I'm not saying that you should be called one, but I am agreeing that posting a thread about ratings is foolish when almost every other thread about ratings drop the OP's rating considerably? We all do something foolish every now and then, so a fool calling you a fool is kinda ironic. No insult intended to either of you; I am most assuredly a fool as well. [smile]Quote:Original post by JBourrieI am hardly a fool, and will request inflammatory remarks like that stay out of the thread.
Once every few weeks some fool decides to "protest" the ratings system by starting a thread like this and watching their rating drop.
I am posting this thread, because from what I've gathered, the style of rating system we have here is nothing more than a glorified karma bot. I've also suggested, numerous times, and quite often ignored, a solution to this glorifired karma bot. Like I've said this solution is ignored, and I am called whiny on top of it.
By some perhaps, not by all. And it wasn't your 'solution' that was being labeled as foolish, it was posting about ratings in the exact way that is commonly posted, and usually ends up with the OP having a smaller rating. And in anycase, 'protesting' the current rating system could be mistaken as whiny.
Quote:Quote:Original post by Servant of the LordQuote:Quote:Original post by JBourrie
You're not a martyr, you're wasting your time.
Did I ever say I was a saint?
No, but you are, aren't you? You don't have to be dead to be a saint, except by some definitions. I believe it was Paul who introduced the term, and he used it to refer to believers in general, and not just the dead.
And, in anycase: "Outside of an academic or religious context, the word 'martyr' is used ironically in casual conversation to refer to someone who seeks attention or sympathy by exaggerating the impact upon themselves of some deprivation or work." - Wikipedia. Which is what I think JBourrie meant, as I'm sure you knew he meant too.
So is there any part of what you said there something I don't agree with. Saint, where I live, generally has the connotations of "perfect person who never mades a mistake"
Ah, there is that definition as well, which I've overlooked. You said "So is there any part of what you said there something I don't agree with."
Could you rephrase that sentence? Do you mean, 'Is there any part of my post that you don't agree with?' or 'There is a part of your post, I don't agree with'? I'm at a bit of a loss on how to respond.
Quote:Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
I fail to see how he contradicted himself, but I agree that one post could cause extreme damage to a person's rating. However, it is not impossible to return from any rating.
No, he said in the paragraph preceding the paragraph preceding that post, and I paraphrase, that this one thread will infact kill my rating. Reread his post. He doublespeaks.
Ah, my mistake. [smile]
Quote:Quote:Original post by Servant of the LordQuote:This is the only site, on the web, that I've found posting about rating as Taboo. Most other sites, requesting a ++ on rating in useful threads, is a perfectly fine thing to do. Heck on some sites it is a standard.And yet, with GDnet it is not. GDnet seems to break from the norm in a couple of ways, for better or for worse. GDnet seems to be a bit more strict on some stuff, and expects higher standard of it's users than most sites I've seen, although I don't go to many other sites.
I've seen sites a lot stricter than GDnet that have to put up with a lot more crap than GDnet. However, this is the only site I've seen ++ rating being taboo.
Is that good or bad, in your opinion? In mine, this isn't so good, but then again, it is not the staff or mods that make it taboo, but the users of the site through more bad ratings. This is rather unfortunate, and I wish it wasn't so, but it is so. I think there was only once I rated someone down for posting about their rating, and I've posted in alot of rating threads. I only rated this poster down because he was a complete jerk.(Although not directed at me)
Quote:Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
Who says that it's over one post? People could be rating you over several posts you made, for all anyone knows. But, incidentally, you have to rate someone from one post or another, unless you rate them from their profile, and even then, there has to be a post finally caused someone to rate you, if they are rating you for a number of posts.
Oh, and I rate people on one post, just so you know. On the spot, if they are posting crap, I down-rate them, although definitely not because of their opinion, and not when they are directing that post at me.
Then wouldn't my solution of rating per post, via a -/+ link at the top of the post make more sense?
Perhaps, but I question whether it is worth changing the forum software, to try a different rating, when the current rating system does what it is intended to do. If it didn't do what it is intended to do, then it would be broken; and if it is broken, surely the staff, who implemented it in the first place, would continue to alter it until it does work. What you are asking is not for a broken system to be fixed, but rather for a new or altered system to be put into place, to give it more features. (To allow you to see for what you are being rated down for)
Quote:Quote:But if you post as AP these non-lounge forums, doesn't that actually lend validity to JBourrie's statement?
Who said I did? I am confused... why is everybody saying don't post as AP outside the lounge if you want your rating to go up so frequently. I am confused.
Stop posting as AP then! [grin]
Yeah, sorry about the confusion, not sure that got started.(Perhaps it's my fault?)
Quote:Again, I will ask, "consequences for what?" I mostly am afraid to be helpful, as even right now there are people writing I am wrong in various forums (though I am not), ...
Actually, the only post I saw you post in the last, oh, twenty minutes or so, you were wrong in what you posted, although it was a minor issue. To your credit, however, you admitted you were wrong, when corrected, and you apologize.
Quote:...and I am pretty sure bad advice will more likely get a -- than a ++. As for insultful comments--many of the threads I've been downrated in, such as this one, I've been repeatively flamed.
Is this considered being flamed? Perhaps; I always thought being flamed was having about 10 or so people jumping down your throat and heaping insults at you and others who share your view. What this is is a pretty much clean, polite thread, and although you have gotten a few mild insults, no obscenities, and no real insults. People are discussing the topic in a sane manner, and although a few have called you whiny, a fool, accused you of trying to be a martyr, etc... this hardly constitutes a flame. Although, perhaps from your point of view it looks different? In any case, if this is a flame, it's an incredibly mild one.
Quote:Heck, earlier in this thread, somebody refered to me as unevolved.
Well, as a creationist, I find that a complement. [grin] (joking, ofcourse)
Quote:Maybe a suggestion box, as an alternative solution could be made. Something that when people downrate, they make a suggestion on what the better behaviour would be. Come on, this random downrating is bound to make more than me nuerotic on the matter.
Or, people could just be mature and PM those they have a problem with, and quitely resolve it.
...
To hard to expect people to be mature, when all evidence tends to the contrary, eh? But that'd be the ideal solution, in my opinion. Ofcourse, for this to work, those that receive complaints must be willing to give them an honest thought, and not just ignore it.
Really though, I had a horrible rating myself for about half the time I've been at GDnet. It only encouraged me to help out more, and win back the gap. In most cases, I try not to take my rating seriously though, although that doesn't always prove easy. [smile]
Oh, and I almost never judge a post by it's rating. There IS a reason why the rating is at the bottom of a post.(Or, if that is purely coincidental, I now give it that reason)
Judging a poster by his or her rating is as foolish as judging a man by his car.
Author
Quote:Original post by PromitQuote:Original post by DakeDesuYou did not outline any specific complaints about the rating system here in the original post. You only vaguely mentioned what you preferred about Perl Monks.
Essentually what you are saying is you want me to fill my posts up with filler--words that are not worth your time to read.
Well, we are aware how this current karma system works enough that I should have to repeat it, including both the pros and cons. I vaguely mentioned perlmonks, as I am sure you are decent enough to do a little bit of research as to how their rating system worked. Since nobody decided to do that, I described it later.
Quote:Original post by Promit
Word economy involves being efficient without throwing away all of the actual information, which you've failed at miserably.
I just described how that is not so.
Quote:Original post by Promit
While your subsequent posts do elaborate (for the poor fools like me who were patient enough to read it),
I hope it wasn't you that called me a matyr (to be honest I've lost track)
Quote:Original post by Promit
your original post comes across as little more than a troll.
See, thats where things get sticky--trolling tends to get defined differently on different sites. Trolling as I am aware of it is an attempt to flamebait an entire discussion of a contriversial topic. Most sites would not consider asking for an improvement on an established system flamebait. Oh GDnet, how you never fail to amaze me.
Quote:Original post by Promit
And in most cases, if the first post is bad, people will not continue reading. If anything, this has been a waste of my time because I read through so many posts to have any idea what your actual objections were.
I was mostly afraid to post my actual objects due to the two things that have been applied to me in the past.
Quote:Original post by Promit
The problem is with you. Take responsibility for your own posts, and stop blaming the system. If you can't understand that, then your rating is doomed to stay exactly where it is.
Again I will state: this is the only system I find blame. Other sites I have no problem dealing with people. On various other sites I've been voted Moderator and Admin. This is the only site, that I today, have the problem of karma hell.
So why is it, that because this site alone things I am a bad person, that I become a bad person. GDnet as an individual in the web forum crowd, is a minority.
I'm basically done with this discussion at this point. However, I should mention that I've spoken to a couple people. Basically, a change in the rating system won't help anything. People are annoyed by you, and they're annoyed by your posts. If you were rated based on the content of your posts, your rating would be even worse than it is now, because people would have the ability to damage you multiple times. Nobody I've spoken to seems to think there's much of anything in your profile that deserves a rating increase. Every thread you are in seems to suddenly go south. Don't bother linking to stuff that you think disproves that; I'm not going to read it and I don't think anybody else is. Only the perception matters.
Like I said, the problem is with you. Let me highlight what I just said:
People are annoyed by you, and they're annoyed by your posts.
Do you hear that? What I'm saying is that your rating here is a completely accurate picture of how people feel about you. If you don't believe me, then that's just too bad. Any other rating system that even vaguely worked would show you as being dismally rated. Any system. The current system is working perfectly; what you aren't coming to grips with is the fact that most people just don't like you.
I'm not going to close this thread, because I feel like I've been involved too much to exercise that power here. But it has run its course, and there isn't anything else worth saying.
Like I said, the problem is with you. Let me highlight what I just said:
People are annoyed by you, and they're annoyed by your posts.
Do you hear that? What I'm saying is that your rating here is a completely accurate picture of how people feel about you. If you don't believe me, then that's just too bad. Any other rating system that even vaguely worked would show you as being dismally rated. Any system. The current system is working perfectly; what you aren't coming to grips with is the fact that most people just don't like you.
I'm not going to close this thread, because I feel like I've been involved too much to exercise that power here. But it has run its course, and there isn't anything else worth saying.
Author
Quote:Original post by Promit
Oh, and you wanted to know where the Lounge percentage was coming from. Basically, click through to your profile and go to see all replies. At the bottom you can filter it down to just the lounge, and it will give you a total count (this will be inaccurate because it won't list deleted posts). Divide by the total post count for the figure.
You have as of now a total of 5960 posts. Of these, 143 are Lounge threads and 5229 are Lounge replies, which puts you a little over 90% in the Lounge.
Nice, you misrepresented me using statistics. I check how many posts in the past year where in the Lounge... remember I do qualify as an Oldbie. While not that much better, in the past year I've only made ~80% of my posts in the lounge, as oppose to the ~90% that I've done since the start of the site.
Author
Quote:Original post by Promit
I'm basically done with this discussion at this point. However, I should mention that I've spoken to a couple people. Basically, a change in the rating system won't help anything. People are annoyed by you, and they're annoyed by your posts. If you were rated based on the content of your posts, your rating would be even worse than it is now, because people would have the ability to damage you multiple times. Nobody I've spoken to seems to think there's much of anything in your profile that deserves a rating increase. Every thread you are in seems to suddenly go south. Don't bother linking to stuff that you think disproves that; I'm not going to read it and I don't think anybody else is. Only the perception matters.
So you admit it is a Junior High popularity contest then.
As per people being annoyed at my posts--why are they telling _you_ that and not _me_. It would solve the problem a lot quicker. If somebody finds something offensive, comment to _me_ about it. Most of the time I don't even know I am being offensive.
Quote:Original post by Promit
Like I said, the problem is with you. Let me highlight what I just said:
People are annoyed by you, and they're annoyed by your posts.
However 99% percent of my posts that become annoying are merely highlighted by other people being just as annoying. So how come their rating isn't 333? I've found it highly annoying that whenever I post something outside the lounge, it is either
(a) Flamed at
(b) Crap posted in
(c) Ignored. Ignored enough that people are convinced I only post outside the lougne as AP.
Then when I try to provide links that prove I do make decent posts, people, such as yourself, the proof is completely ignored to keep your innocence of the idea that I may actually be useful.
On top of that, it seems everybody is talking behind my back. You can say it directly to my face--there is no way I can threaten any harm onto you. About the only thing I can do, is continue on with something to say I am wrong or right. And if I am wrong, I will admit it, as it has been displayed several times.
Quote:Original post by Promit
Do you hear that? What I'm saying is that your rating here is a completely accurate picture of how people feel about you.
Again, you are not distilling any belief into me that this is not a Junior High popularity contest.
Quote:Original post by Promit
If you don't believe me, then that's just too bad. Any other rating system that even vaguely worked would show you as being dismally rated. Any system. The current system is working perfectly; what you aren't coming to grips with is the fact that most people just don't like you.
Look at this, you try to claim that it is not a Junior High Populatity contest, but on your own emphasis, you prove it to be so.
Quote:Original post by Promit
I'm not going to close this thread, because I feel like I've been involved too much to exercise that power here. But it has run its course, and there isn't anything else worth saying.
Fair enough.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
