or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The new "ratings"

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
OK - I think they are fun, but what do we actually base our votes on?

Its pretty clear that the one thing the new ratings shouldn’t be based on is total number of posts because that data is separately available.

So what do people think we should base them on - helpfulness, congeniality, knowledge, speed of response to questions, gregariousness, teaching ability (on the computer, not on the slope), clarity of exposition, free goodies, gut feeling or what?


PS - Free beer for everyone - I'm buying

post #2 of 28
My suggestion is:

Quality of the member's contribution to the forum.

This can come in a variety of ways such as...
<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI>Expert Instruction
<LI>Good Questions from ALL Abilities
<LI>Inspiring Photos
<LI>Entertaining Stories
<LI>Anything Else You Find Appealing[/list]
post #3 of 28
Thread Starter 
Whoops - I just scrolled way down the thread titled, "What Do You Think of the Site Upgrade?" and found the following from AC:

> Member Ratings -- Rate members 1 through 5
> (5 is highest) on the quality of their
> contributions.

OK - that partially answers my question, but there are a lot of aspects to quality, so I'd still be interested in what people think.

> The ratings system
> is "smart" in that those with high ratings
> are given more weight when rating others.

WAY COOL !!! Bob, AC, all you other 5 star guys - you scratch my back ...

Just joking [img]smile.gif[/img]

Tom / PM
post #4 of 28
Would my charming personality give me a good rating?
Maybe my reputation as a 'gear' addict?
Or am I going to have to wait until we get going with a bump skiing thread again on the instruction section?

post #5 of 28
how come I had five stars a while ago and now I only have four?

was it something i said?
post #6 of 28
someone please rate me... I feel left out.
post #7 of 28

only because i have a big heart....and I want my other star back......
post #8 of 28
thanks all. I feel the love.
post #9 of 28
it doesen't seem like you can change you rating of anyone once you posted it. The problem is now I have to be oh so very, very, politically correct otherwise I lose stars!

Booorrrring! [img]tongue.gif[/img]
post #10 of 28
No problema Lisamarie.

I'll still give you a 5, even if you are politically incorrect.
post #11 of 28
post #12 of 28
LindaA, that is a 1 star deduction for posting in all caps...

Seriously though, I've been on forums where people get rated and it just seems like you rate someone well if they gave a great/helpful response and you rate them poorly if they seems to be jerks.

Doesn't seem to mean much, except when you see somebody with a very poor rating. I usually put more stock in what a person says I've read their posts before anyways.
post #13 of 28
No offense, really, but my guess is that whining about where your stars are ccould get people annoyed. Kind of like the girl who says to the guy : Oh love me, please love me PLEASE LOVE ME!!! :

I wouldn't take it too seriously.
post #14 of 28
not taking it seriously...was partly joking in that post. Just concerned that I may have offended somone, inadvertently. in fact, i may well turn off that silly feature.
post #15 of 28
Whoa, I started with 5 stars, dropped to 4, and now back up to 5....the recession is over!
I might turn it off too....I am just too fragile for objective analysis.
post #16 of 28
I don't like being judged by others.
post #17 of 28
Yeah, I know what you mean. I feel like I now have to act like Bambi: "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all!"
post #18 of 28
Im think Im too sensitive too...I just dont want to offend or annoy anybody here and I dont even KNOW anyone!!!

do with my stars what you will....
post #19 of 28
Haha... Lisamarie - the day you keep your opinions to yourself - I will know that hell froze over and we will be skiing on it.
post #20 of 28
I suppose I need to post at least once to see how this all works.
post #21 of 28
I agree, this is too subjective. In theory I could see how its beneficial, but I don't hink how it will be a positive addition to this forum. Like posted above, everyone is going ot be looking over their shoulders.
post #22 of 28
I'm trying to get a worse rating that SCSA [img]smile.gif[/img]
SCSA - wot you got so far?
post #23 of 28
Don't care for it. Judging other contributors does not seem like something we should be doing or concerning ourselves with. It just feels wrong to me.
post #24 of 28
Here's an idea on the ratings...

Maybe instead on individual members (thus seeming like you're running for office), ratings can be attached to individual POSTS. After all, when people think something is helpful, useful, well stated, they are rating the post, not the person. This is what happens on all the mlb sites. Sure, you can look up (in the profile section) what the avg is for the poster (usually not limited to high totals but I don't see why that feature could not carry over), if it seems desirable.

Anyway, this could be less about personal approval ratings and more about recommending something meritous. Eh?

post #25 of 28
I'm with Mike_M, get rid of it. It's a contentious issue at best.

I fear that this forum will be viewed as extremely elitist if we continue to evaluate the "quality" of each individual post or person. Too subjective and meaningless - just like Survivor.

This isn't kindergarten where we're competing for little gold stars.

Heck, I don't need a black belt to validate myself either since I'd still get my butt kicked... [img]smile.gif[/img]

post #26 of 28
The people have spoken.
post #27 of 28
I am a bit neutral on these ratings but it does appear to be a way of toning down the retoric. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #28 of 28
Ditch the ratings - it could chill discussion. Besides, the disagreements (within reason) keep this forum entertaining!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion