Thanks for the clarification on how the rating system is working Cliff!
If someone has even a fair number of ratings, they would really have to cause problems on the forums to get their negatives up to a 90% level.
One more question (sorry I have to!) Once the system is fully set up, will a member be able to review who they voted for, and what the vote was? Or is it just up to people to rate someone again to be sure they have rated them how they want.
Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: It isn't the number of negatives that will get someone banned. It is the ratio of negatives vs positives. Suppose you've been a member on the forum for quite some time, and so far you've been pretty helpful and you've been raking 50 positives. Then you get in a flamewar and people start giving you negatives. This means that you'll need at least 50 negatives extra or 25 of those positives changed to negatives to make your overall rating neutral.
Right now, the system warns you when more than 80% of the ratings you have received are negatives (the red bar starts flashing). Time to clean up your act then. When more than 90% of your ratings are negatives, the system bans you. Remember that anybody can change their rating for you. So if they have previously rated you negative, cleaning up your act might persuade them to change their rating to positive.
So in short, you have complete control over your own rating. If 90% rather see you go - even if you have made a positive contribution to the forum previously - then it's bye-bye for you.[/B]
Just my luck I get the thread to page six right after this post by Cliff, so I thought I'd do a quote post to bring it over to pg 6 too.
[This message has been edited by Fformula88 (edited 09-18-2002).]
This is beginning to look like the thread to rate everyone - sooner or later we all will be in this post (and who says no one ever looks at the announcements?).
Personally, I think this is a great idea! - ok, cliff, now what are you going to do for an encore???
CLiff, not to get you mad that I keep asking this question but.. Lets say "friresds" gives me a negative because hes a troll and hes mad at everyone on the forum so he gives everyone a negative, then he is banned, will that negative dissapear off of our ratings?
Originally posted by CoryFiero: CLiff, not to get you mad that I keep asking this question but.. Lets say "friresds" gives me a negative because hes a troll and hes mad at everyone on the forum so he gives everyone a negative, then he is banned, will that negative dissapear off of our ratings?
Oops, sorry, meant to answer that a few times already. Yes, when somebody is banned, all rating he has done will be removed.
quote
Originally posted by Fformula88: Once the system is fully set up, will a member be able to review who they voted for, and what the vote was?
I'd say so far so good, my only suggestion would be to reduce the minimum number of posts displayed to more like 25 (as opposed to 50). That way newer members and those that may not post as frequently show up sooner.
Cliff- you just keep "remodeling" this place making it better all the time. Thanks for your hard work and effort!
I agree with most of the people here, 25 votes might be enough. 50 is a bit high. The system has been in for quite a few days and only 3 members so far now has rating shown. Just my 2 cents.
I don't know if this is possible, but do you think it might be a good idea to be able to put an indicator under a member's bar or name indicating you have or haven't voted? I have a terrible memory, and I sometimes forget I already voted for some members.
I agree with the 25 thing. I don't think I personally will get 50 votes....I really only stay in one section, and I don't post AS MUCH as others. But YOU DA MAN!! It's up to you. Thanks.
Paula
------------------ Friends don't let friends drive drunk.
In Memory of: Ryan Norton 1981-2002 Christine Lamprecht 1980-2002
Maybe this has been covered. I have only been reading what Cliff says since he sums it up pretty good. 1st If you get banned can you be reinstated if members change their rating of you. 2nd Lets say I have used the forum for 2 years and have 500 positve remarks. In this time some of the people who have rated me have left the forum. That would mean that I would have to get all that I have to get 750 negatives to be banned right. I gues what I am saying is if the member is not active for a year shouldn't thier feedback be cancelled. 3rd Will it be available to see your own if you are under 50. 4th Will you be able to see who you voted for and/or who voted for you and what was voted. Sorry for the lengthy reply.
While this thread is bumped, I would like to ask a few questions.
1: Will you ever reinstate the -/+ breakdown? 2: When will it be out of the test mode? (were you can actually be banned) 3: Are you going to tell us how many negatives we need to be banned, and the length of time they need to be that number. 4: Would you consider making a page with members in order from highest rating to lowest, once they get above 50, I mean like a list. Obviouslt, you would be first, and then have 2nd 3rd ect. ect. 5: Are you planning on keeping the number at 50, for everyone to see there rating?
Sorry for all the questions, you don't have to answer them all if you don't want to, I guess I'm a little nosey
If you get banned can you be reinstated if members change their rating of you
Nope. That would be too little too late. People will get ample warning when they are in the danger zone.
Lets say I have used the forum for 2 years and have 500 positve remarks. In this time some of the people who have rated me have left the forum. That would mean that I would have to get all that I have to get 750 negatives to be banned right. I gues what I am saying is if the member is not active for a year shouldn't thier feedback be cancelled.
I'm still thinking bout a "lifespan" for a rating. Haven't figured it out yet.
3rd Will it be available to see your own if you are under 50.
Yes, you will be able to see your own rating at any time.
4th Will you be able to see who you voted for and/or who voted for you and what was voted.
You will see what your rating for a specific person is. You will not be able to see who rated you (and thus also not how he rated you).
Will you ever reinstate the -/+ breakdown?
Don't know yet.
When will it be out of the test mode? (were you can actually be banned)
As soon as I got all things implemented.
Are you going to tell us how many negatives we need to be banned, and the length of time they need to be that number.
Yes.
Would you consider making a page with members in order from highest rating to lowest, once they get above 50, I mean like a list.
No, this is not a contest.
Are you planning on keeping the number at 50, for everyone to see there rating?
Probably, since if you get less than 50 ratings, I don't think the rating means anything.
I was wondering what people would think if a rating expired after a certain amount of time. So if you rated someone "negative", this would automatically change to "neutral" after, say, 60 days. That way, people with negative ratings would have a fair chance to get it back in the positives again. The drawback is that "positive" ratings would become "neutral" after a while as well.
Of course, I could also leave it as it is now.
[This message has been edited by Cliff Pennock (edited 10-02-2002).]
I definitely wouldn't want ratings I've given out to revert back to Neutral... if I rate someone, I'd like it to stay that way until I they give me reason to change it myself (which I would do if they did something to change my mind).
------------------ Patrick W. Heinske -- LZeitgeist@aol.com 1988 Red Fiero Formula - 1st Place - Stock Coupe - FOCOSEVA 2000 - 3rd Place - Stock Formula - FOCOA Nat'l 2001 - Class Winner - 1982 to Present - Tarheel Tigers All-Pontiac Show 2001 - Class Winner - Fiero: All Years - Tarheel Tigers All-Pontiac Show 2002
From what I understand, GTdude, you don't have enough people rating you yet to see the bar. I already rated you, so rate me, Im still waiting to see my bar.
Originally posted by LZeitgeist: I definitely wouldn't want ratings I've given out to revert back to Neutral... if I rate someone, I'd like it to stay that way until I they give me reason to change it myself (which I would do if they did something to change my mind).
I agree,but I also think that if someone is banned,after a period of time they could be allowed to be reinstated with a probation period.If they were banned again it would be permanent.
quote
Originally posted by LZeitgeist: I definitely wouldn't want ratings I've given out to revert back to Neutral... if I rate someone, I'd like it to stay that way until I they give me reason to change it myself (which I would do if they did something to change my mind).
To add to what I already said,during the probation period the conditions for banning would be more agressive(something less than 90%)
[This message has been edited by hugh (edited 10-03-2002).]
possibly, (just a random thaught) instead of a lifespan, make it so only the last 50 or so actually count toward how far in the red or green you are, but have the actual rating #'s shown, The problem with having a lifespan is, you have a positivly contributing "forum lurker" member, They may be a good member, but there rating continually dies off to a "not yet rated" because of rating life spans. But I would still like to see how many ratings both negative and positive I have, It seems other people want to see that too. It's just a thaught.
You will ALWAYS keep a tally of your good points and bad-points. But after what, 60 days, they no-longer count towards the banning tally. IF you have almost nothing but positives anyway, but get up a few people's noses, their negative votes lose their "potency" after 60 days.
Could even have it on a sliding scale. Why not instead of a life-span, assign negative votes a DECAY rate...
tally = bad.value + good.value
if tally >= 50 then If bad.value >= (tally/2) then ban = true endif endif
while bad.value >= 0 if bad.timestamp <=60 then bad.value = 1/(bad.timestamp/15) Else bad.value = 0.0125
Forgive my probably many mistakes... Call it psuedo-code
(btw, RATE ME! )
[This message has been edited by Mach10 (edited 10-05-2002).]
Just wondering why some rating bars show a total number of votes underneath, and some just show the bar without the total... wasn't sure if that was an option that was being considered, or a glitch for a few members.
Originally posted by gt boy: hey cliff...some people have said that they have rated me...but i do not see the bar chart under my user name. whats up with that?
You need to be rated at least 50 times for the bar to show up. Here is some help!
[This message has been edited by Fformula88 (edited 10-28-2002).]
Suggestion for the lifespan idea. How about if only the negatives have a lifespand of like 90 days. Let everyone keep the positive or neutral posts unless the person that made a positive post changes it to negative.
This would let people keep the good ratings and give the people with bad ratings a second chance. Also, if negatives stick around for 90 days it will give forum members a chance to "vote them off the island".
Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: I'm finishing a few small things first.
I was wondering what people would think if a rating expired after a certain amount of time. So if you rated someone "negative", this would automatically change to "neutral" after, say, 60 days. That way, people with negative ratings would have a fair chance to get it back in the positives again. The drawback is that "positive" ratings would become "neutral" after a while as well.
Of course, I could also leave it as it is now.
[This message has been edited by Cliff Pennock (edited 10-02-2002).]
No, I don't like the 60 day expiration rule.....maybe 2 months would be better
(sorry I have to!) Once the system is fully set up, will a member be able to review who they voted for, and what the vote was? Or is it just up to people to rate someone again to be sure they have rated them how they want.
j/k and it says error opening file.
