New Rating System

Post by **Lieva** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:59 am

...

like i said

if someone makes a 'ml5 BG on 12th december stygia' and it gets rated as a flame thread then its common sence not telepathy that the person who rated was being biased regarding the poster - unless you think that a person who makes a Ml post should be flamed?

Finolin · Post by **Finolin** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:09 am

If you really think it's always (or generally, or often?) so obvious if something is a flame or not, why have a rating system at all?

But if we're just going to repeat ourselves, I'll stick to this one:

Finolin wrote:is there anyone other than Lairiodd and yourself who thinks this system is a good idea?

Overdue · Post by **Overdue** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 9:48 am

Rating systems bugged anyway, I can't sell my shares and I have to close them.. wtf o_O

Sharkith · Post by **Sharkith** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 10:19 am

Banana wrote:...

like i said

if someone makes a 'ml5 BG on 12th december stygia' and it gets rated as a flame thread then its common sence not telepathy that the person who rated was being biased regarding the poster - unless you think that a person who makes a Ml post should be flamed?

but thats just it Nanna and Lairoidd - what is being rated the person or the post? This is where the source of the confusion and complications arise in all of these rating systems. Heta has hit the nail on the head and we have said it before. The system that works best is one where it promotes the rating of someone post. Now yes there might be effects derivded from whether or not people like each other and this might affect their tendency to agree - but as Heta said there are systems where one has to spread the lubb.

We moved from a system where the semantics were - 'I agree' or 'I disagree' with the post that then connected this rating to a property of the individual's standing in the community. So someone's personal rating by the community could be affected. Therefore you could effectively vote for two things whether or not you liked the person or whether or not you liked the post. That is why it caused so much harm - because it was not clear what people were voting for. So some arseholes could act like tchildren and always vote the person down whilst others might have been rating the posts, and other doing a bit of both.

In this system you have a rating based on the qualitative elements of the post from flame to very informative. People then also trade points for another value which reflects their ability to reflect or guage the community's views on things. These are two seperate things and of course they lead to confusion. So when I vote or rate a post now I am simultaneously trying to second guess what everyone else will think. For the extreme cases everyone might agree but in the grey cases one cannot be so sure and so one ceases to trade.

I have not read anything where anyone is having a go at the Mods in this thread. It is simply a reflection of the confusion that the dual semantics underpinning the systems operate with - at the end of the day it is overcomplicated thats all.

Thats why Heta is right - keep it simple and make sure people cannot gang together. Personally I would remove any particular rating of person's because after all we are not here for these silly games. We are here because we love chatting.

Sharkith

Ankh Morpork · Post by **Ankh Morpork** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 11:14 am

Thats exactly how I see it too Sharkith...imo this is a total waste of time.

/Ankh

OohhoO · Post by **OohhoO** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 1:31 pm

Banana wrote: if someone makes a 'ml5 BG on 12th december stygia' and it gets rated as a flame thread then its common sence not telepathy that the person who rated was being biased regarding the poster - unless you think that a person who makes a Ml post should be flamed?

Depends ...
If they posted "ML5 BG 12th December 19:00 GMT / 20:00 CET meeting Stygia Haven /BG join L33td00D" then there seems no reason for it to get a negative rating.
On the other hand if they posted "ML BG Tuesday" I might well give it a negative rating.
Opinions can differ between individuals, that's part of the fascination of rating systems IMO.

Finolin wrote:is there anyone other than Lairiodd and yourself who thinks this system is a good idea?

/bump

Post by **Lairiodd** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 7:26 pm

OK made those changes. Changed the ratings so they are only positive. Every post now has 1 automatic rating of average. This means that ratings are needed to move it higher than average. Also, mods now count the same as everyone else. I still need to do a cron job to remove old ratings. Probably after a week the current rating will be taken as the concensus or something.

Satyn · Post by **Satyn** » Fri Nov 25, 2005 10:09 pm

yay! i can play again!

OohhoO · Post by **OohhoO** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:36 pm

Well ...
it's a definate improvement ...

I still understand Bahnhof about most of it tho

Assets ...
Credits ...
Max Risk ...
Step Size ...
No clue whatsoever what that's all about.

Apparently in my day 1 experiments I lost about 10k

I was well in profit at one point but then closed something to see what would happen & was suddenly about 10k lower than before, which isn't a problem really, except for the fact that I just don't have the slightest clue why :lol:

Is there a University course somewhere which can explain the system well enough so that I don't lose another 10k next time I hit a button to see what it does?

Post by **Lairiodd** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:49 pm

Assets is the total amount of units held multiplied by their current price.

Credits is the total amount of "cash".

Max risk is the total number of units you will auto buy or sell. "Selling" reduces that number. If it is 0, then you will sell all your units held.

Step size is how much your offer changes when you buy a unit. If you were willing to pay 600, after you buy you will pay only 590 if there is a step of 10.