|10-20-2004 07:42 PM|
I usually don't get involved in these Tug of Wars, but I have to agree Dan (Dinger Dan). When someone posts a question in one of the Tech forums and their are six replies and one is 180 out from the others, the person asking will know who is credible and who isn't. As for numbers, thats all it is --a number. Big deal.
|10-20-2004 06:31 PM|
on the top posters, i am #703!!
yeah, and over thousands of members!
hey jon, i feel a little better.
|10-20-2004 06:31 PM|
|dinger||You all seem to be making mountains of molehills. There are no rewards for the most post counts, tech questions can be answered with knowledge by many of our members, it doesn't take long to sort the bs'ers from the knowledgeable posters, what's the big deal? At least now when you look at a membership date and a post count, people won't be wondering what you do with all your time. I like this new system, maybe some of you will get to working on your rides. Computers and the net are cool, but where do some of you find time to get anything done? Dan|
|10-20-2004 05:48 PM|
|[email protected]||The ultimate measure of value to the board would be to average a post rating for the user. Unfortunately, very few if any posts get rated by the users. Maybe there is a way to measure blood pressure or face temperature thru the monitor for each reader of each post?!|
|10-20-2004 05:40 PM|
karma system lol. There are going to be some niiiiiice posters after you do that!
|10-20-2004 05:30 PM|
tm454 -- I thought the dual post count thing was a good idea too. I think I'll be adding it to the list of modifications for our next board version upgrade. I agree too that the Lounge does have relevance, and that's why it's there. Nothing's been deleted, and the atmosphere is pretty much still the same. Fun and relaxed is what we want in there, but we don't want it to be our meat and potatoes.
k2mooch -- yes, this is one of the expected results. Tech forum mods are on the lookout for that. And, since they cover "tech" turf, the editing/Dumping standards are stricter, so we are on firmer ground.
I can see some of the central themes we're grinding away at here.
Is there a way to numerically assess someone's "value" as a board member?
First you would have to try to define "value", which would be very difficult. Then you would have to decide what data you already have about members that could be computed into a representative number.
To pose a very simple example, let's say you decided that "value" meant: how long you've been here, how many posts you have, and how many tech posts you have. So, you could put the following pieces of information into a simple formula:
j -- number of days since join date
n -- number of posts
t -- number of tech posts
x -- our final, adjusted "post count number"
Your simple formula could look like this:
10j + 15n + 20t = x
In the formula above, I give the most weight to tech posts, followed by full post count, followed by seniority.
Obviously, a "real" formula would include more factors, such as:
--number of views received by threads in which you posted
--number of pics in your gallery
--number of entries in your journal
--number of links you posted in tech forums
And many, many others. You would weight each one accordingly, so if someone, say, posted 50 pics in their gallery, their score wouldn't jump too high.
Once you had a basic formula, you would run it against your database, to see how people scored. Then, you would adjust your formula until you thought it produced reasonable results. You might want to group the counts together -- for example, a 1500 and a 1590 would both read "1500". That way, you wouldn't be trying to be so exact.
There are some boards that use prefab systems similar to the example above. And there are boards that use what is known as a "karma"-type system, where users score and rate each other. I've checked out many of them, and toyed around with building our own. It may be something we end up doing. But for now, I wanted to make a very basic change, and then take it from there.
|10-20-2004 04:14 PM|
Here's a thought. . . . .
If people just post to get attention and want credibility, then won't slicing out Lounge posts only encourage them to flood the technical section with crap just to boost their post number just to look good?
If post numbers are there to extablish credibility, how do we know if the high poster is the one asking the questions, answering them, or just making thoughtless comments towards a technical question?
On a side note, I think it's kinda funny how we are discussing a subject right now that is for the benefit of the site in the lounge, and it doesn't count because only topics that benefit the site are counted.
|10-20-2004 03:57 PM|
It all counts, even the BS!
What ever happened to the idea of a post count to a particular forum instead of a total post count? That way we see who's posting in the engine forum or who's the real trans guys are and paint and body and so on. Or how about a total post count only in the Lounge and the individual counts in those particular forums? The lounge has as much relevance as do the other forums...guys get together in the garage and BS about all kinds of things...except say politics and religion of course!! There is relevance to the conversations in the lounge as much as anywhere else in hotrodders.com. I'm not always thinking engine building Even if I'm engine building. There should be a relaxed atmosphere for the lounge to flourish too. I find it fun there...nothing serious or mind boggling!!
Rat Rods Rule!
|10-20-2004 03:41 PM|
lol pretty "punny" jon lol
|10-20-2004 03:22 PM|
I can see your points killerformula. It is a really rough tool. Age is certainly less rough. However, age can easily be forged. This is why we didn't make it mandatory on the application form (there is a discussion somewhere in here about that issue).
There are numerous cases, like the one you mentioned, where post count is inaccurate as a measure of the aspects I discussed. However, I do believe it is useful in an overall, general sense.
Check out our top 100 posters. There are certainly some usernames on that list that I wouldn't consider our most knowledgeable tech guys, but OVERALL, it's a fairly decent ROUGH assessment, IMO.
I understand that, no matter what, the decision still sits uneasily with some people. But I do think it's "roughly" reasonable .
|10-20-2004 03:16 PM|
|Ghetto Jet||Far from whining killer, it's a progressive thought.|
|10-20-2004 03:13 PM|
You're doing a lot of speculating over a number that's definition varies from person to person. The ONLY thing it DIRECTLY measures is verbosity, and even then, a post-per-day count is a more accurate tool.
My issue is that I think you're presupposing that members are going to use the post count as a "tool" in the way you've designed. You've talked about "knee-jerk" reactions before Jon, think of yourself as a new member.
The truth is the post-count is a very "rough" tool, even as you described it. Its also an erroneous tool to use to really make any judgment about the quality of advice you're going to get from somebody. Take me for example: I have almost as many posts as the top posters on this board, yet willy's has probably 30 years more experience than I!
If you need a tool to measure the quality or extent of somebody's knowledge, an amalgamation of posts from different forums is really a poor tool, especially for somebody who is scanning this info quickly.
I would even contend that age, (dare I say it???!!) is a better tool for a ROUGH idea of how knowledgeable a member is. Again, roughly. The other word you used is reliable, but numerically I would reiterate that a post-per-day readout would be more useful.
In the end I don't care about post counts (thus the reason I have denounced their usefulness in my above posts, I'm sure I'll get flamed for "whining," none the less ). Just trying to give you another objective perspective-
|10-20-2004 03:13 PM|
hey can I get a post credit for that idea? lol
|10-20-2004 03:03 PM|
|Jon||Good idea -- I'll keep it in mind. Actually, that's what we did with the Dump -- you need 10+ posts to see it. There are some other Lounge modifications we can make, such as removing Lounge posts from the "daily active topcs" and "new posts lists". We'll see where this current modification takes us, and we'll go from there.|
|10-20-2004 02:40 PM|
Jon, I have an idea that I think is pretty good.
I understand wanting to get more technical, maybe the lounge shouldn't be viewable by browsers or new members until they hit a certain post count. That should weed out some trolls from joining and people who have nothing to contribute technically.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|