Discussion on Forum Post Ranking

[Ug]

I've posted a discussion about post ranking - i.e. "newbie" or "Fedora Pro" in the Suggestions & Feedback forum. Please check it out here (http://www.fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2988), and let us know what you think.

[Edit]Due to an error on my part - conversation will have to continue here.

[Varkk]

Invalid thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the webmaster

[jale2ice]

Yeah, Ug... What happened?

It seemed like an interesting discussion... I wanted to continue putting my 2 cents in.

[ghaefb]

that's funny :)

[Thoreau]

where'd it go? I wanted to see the out come of the thread.

[Ug]

I do have a confession to make. My mouse slipped when editing the thread - and it got deleted. :eek:

So if you want to carry it on here - please do! I'm feeling quite guilty...

[Tashiro]

Hey Ug,

Don't feel guilty everybody makes mistakes!

Anyway I believe that adding "junior member" and "fedora master" is a good idea. (this was mentioned in the delete thread)

Adding spedial ranks is a good thing too, cause i'm a newbie now with almost 25 posts which makes me a member. Cool to be part of the community!! But if I post about 75 more then I will be a "fedora pro", I am sure that I will be at that point still a novice in my skills!
So those special ranks are perfect to grade someone his or her skill!!

Tashiro

[crackers]

From the *ahem* previous thread, I noted that the titles were "kewl" but they conveyed absolutely no meaning beyond the fact that somebody posts a lot here and has nothing to do with their actual abilities regarding Fedora and computing. (To be honest, I was actually a little insulted to be a "n00b" when I first started posting - I've been dinking around with Linux since the Dark Ages!)

On the Sun Java Developer's site, the forums there have the ability to assign a certain "value" to questions by the poster (Duke Dollars) and for the poster to award all or some of the "Dukes" to people responding to the thread. While the system isn't perfect, it does work fairly well in being able to tell whether or not a response from X might be just what you're looking for, just by the number of "Dukes". One of the down-sides is that there are an extremely large number of "drive-by" postings, where the poster gets his/her one question answered and "skips town" leaving the Dukes un-rewarded. (There's also a large number of "do-my-homework" requests, which get the attention they richly deserve.)

If the system is based as it is now, what's to stop some knucklehead from posting random garbage to each and every thread, just to drive up their posting tally and get an even "kewler" title?

My suggestion is that the "kewl" titles be dispensed based upon a similar point system, with everyone getting a "starting balance" that seems reasonable. Of course, the Moderators In Their Infinite Wisdom, might feel it would also be appropriate to award a larger beginning balance to those they deem worthy.

Not only is this a nice (albeit virtual) way of saying "Thanks," but it will be easier to see if someone actually knows what they're talking about in general terms. I don't think we'd experience quite as much issues with drive-bys as the Java Forums, but, to be honest, I don't know how much effort would be required to modify this forum's software to incorporate that feature.

And can we make the damn reply-fields a bit wider? I feel like I'm typing in a closet! :D

[Ug]

lol.

What I posted before deleting it *ahem*, was that we just have a couple of ranks for posting. Which actually sound like just Forum ranks. i.e. Forum Newbie, Forum Member, Forum Regular.

Then we could assign a few other titles based on experience, helpfulness etc. I'm not quite sure what these would be or what the criteria would be though.

One thing I don't want to see though is user custom titles, when the user can decide - then it just gets a bit silly.

[crackers]

Originally posted by Ug
Then we could assign a few other titles based on experience, helpfulness etc. I'm not quite sure what these would be or what the criteria would be though.
That's the beauty of a numeric-based system (based on the number of Fedora F... okay, I don't know what to call 'em) - you can adjust "titles" separately and the forum software translates 1000 FF's to "FEDORA GHOD!". It'd obviously be hit-or-miss at first, but pretty soon you'll get a good statistical analysis and be able to tweak along the way...
One thing I don't want to see though is user custom titles, when the user can decide - then it just gets a bit silly.
Silly-ER - I think we started off as "silly" (but kinda "cute" in a non-teddy-bear-like manner)

[Ug]

I'm a bit unsure about a points system. I'm gonna need a bit more convincing.

There seems to be something a bit too inhuman about it. ;)

[crackers]

Well, the interesting thing about it is that the person who started the topic (and possibly assigned a value they think is appropriate for the "correct" answer) is the one handing out the points. So you get a pretty even distribution system based on request/answer/reward. For example, a poster describes a problem and assigns 10 FFs to it:

"Wow! That fixed my problem exactly! Here's 10 FFs for your effort!"

"Okay, that didn't quite solve it but it got me started in the right direction - you'll get half the FFs"

"Lots of people replied and gave valuable hints - 1 FF to everyone!"

Not saying it's perfect system, but I think it's a bit better than "rankings" based on the number of posts.

(Yes, I'm on vacation with nothing better to do than hang around here... beats yard-work any day!)

[Ug]

We tried the "Resolved", "Not Resolved" thing with the threads in the Support forum. Which failed pretty bad and that relied upon user input in such a way as you're saying.

The problem is - is that newbies and casual visitors just don't bother with that stuff.

[genci]

I agree that the number of posts a person has can bear no relation to their technical ability. However I find that assigning "points" to posts to be confusing to the forum newbie, causing more problems to admin when someone gets it wrong, forgets to assign points or demands their answer was the deserving post etc ...

I really wouldn't like to see this forum use that system. If someone posts bad advice, it normally gets corrected by a another poster so whether your problem was solved by a newbie or guru, it doesn't matter.

However, the current "ranking" system could be modified so that you have a New Member status for the first X amount of posts and then you become a Member. The Member status level should last for quite some time - possibly 499 posts. Next level of Senior Member is 500-999 posts. Only above that level would you introduce a status of Fedora Pro and then so on. You can, like some forums I know, remove the actual post count from displaying under the persons name - it can still be viewed under the profile though. This gets around the whole "post count" issue.

Admin should retain the right to change a person's status to a higher level earlier when a member obviously has the history and know-how behind them.

So, in summary:
New Member 0-24 posts
Member 25-499
Senior Member 500-999
Fedora Pro 1000-1999
Fedora Master 2000+

And, remove the actual post count number from being displayed.


My 2 cents :)

[Ug]

By that reckoning even I wouldn't be a "master"!

It's not very practical though, and is more or less what we have now. Back to the drawing board methinks.

[crackers]

Originally posted by genci
Admin should retain the right to change a person's status to a higher level earlier when a member obviously has the history and know-how behind them.
And how is that determined? That actually puts a helluva lot of a burden upon the administrators to figure out who's got a clue and who doesn't. I sure wouldn't want the responsibility for that.
And, remove the actual post count number from being displayed.
No, that is a good idea. I also like "bumping" up the amount needed to reach the "regular" categories.

[foolish]

I had my post in the thread that got deleted *ahem* where I stated my idea. I don't want a rating system where we give every user points. I just think we could give good posts some credit now and again. Other than that the current ranking system is just fine.

So here's my idea: (again)
Users that have reached a certain level have the ability to add good posts to a list of good posts. Every now and then, like once a month or so, the post that get's the most votes by the experienced forum members is "Post of the month" (WOHO!). This is announced on the front page and we all read it over and over and wonder why we didn't think of that.

This way we get a fairly simple system that only require input from the people who are already giving loads of it, and the new users see how to ask and answer the good way.

[micha]

I like crackers' idea where you rate the posts according to the help it gives. You should introduce the "one-click post rating" system, something like 5 buttons allowing the topic starter or participants to rate the posts.

[Varkk]

Originally posted by crackers
From the *ahem* previous thread, I noted that the titles were "kewl" but they conveyed absolutely no meaning beyond the fact that somebody posts a lot here and has nothing to do with their actual abilities regarding Fedora and computing. (To be honest, I was actually a little insulted to be a "n00b" when I first started posting - I've been dinking around with Linux since the Dark Ages!)

Well if someone builds up a large number of posts without providing useful input they would quickly get a reputation. Sure not much use to new members but if they tried to help a newbie then hopefully one of the seasoned pros can see it and correct it quickly. Also if someone does spam bad to get a better title they can be banned fairly quickly. (Not an ideal solution I know, but it does work).

[crackers]

We've only really started building a community here - c'mon, it's only been a couple of months, really. I hung on Usenet for a while and it took me a year of posting before one of the regulars there followed up with "what he said."

While there is a bit of "policing" that's been done, none of us "regulars" (and, yes, I'm counting myself as one) really knows the others well enough to have informed opinions on clue-level. Yes, I've traded some barbs with Gareth (but he sets himself up so nicely) and a couple of wink-winks with Sailor, but, to be honest, I don't think "we" have been around long enough to have solidified a collective voice.

I humbly suggest that this topic be shelved for the time being and revisted, say, 6 months from now...

[vinu]

This discussion is not going to bear fruit unless we first decide
* what these rankings do actually mean in the first place
* what purpose do these rankings serve.

IMHO, the current ranking system on this BBS is not perfect in that some of the titles used are inappropriate. The terms "newbie", "member" and "senior member" are allright contextually, but a term like "fedora pro" is plain misleading. Using a title like Fedora Pro based on the number of posts a user posts is just not right.

If these rankings were supposed to denote how long or how much a user has contributed to this forum, you could probably use a term like "Distinguished member" or "Tux fellow" or something similar instead of "Fedora Pro".

On the other hand, if this ranking is supposed to denote how experienced a person posting on this forum is, the present ranking system based on number of posts is inappropriate. You'd need to introduce a value based system for posts (like some posters have already mentioned before me), in which all posts are tagged with a value, and rankings are based on these collective values. The question that then arises is how this post value is to be decided: this could be done either by the moderators (a difficult task, unless one of the moderators is willing to spend a _lot_ of time), or by the fedoraforum community itself...

In my opinion, the current system should be enough, if their purpose is only to denote how long a member has been on this forum, but maybe the term Fedora Pro should probably be modified to something more appropriate.

Regards,
Vinu.

[Ug]

Originally posted by crackers
I humbly suggest that this topic be shelved for the time being and revisted, say, 6 months from now... OK - but |I'll remove the misleading "Fedora Pro" title.

[crackers]

Originally posted by Ug
I'll remove the misleading "Fedora Pro" title.
Believe it or not, that actually does make me feel a bit better - Old Phart, yes, "Pro" - no way!

[Ug]

I've now made it so you only a senior member for 100 - 249 posts, and a "Forum Regular" for 250 and above posts.

So crackers you have some work to do. ;)

[Prometheus]

I don't really see the point in the post ranking. We can leave the post numbers on the bottom, and can leave the admin and moderator rankings under the names, but other than those distinctions, i dont really care what the ranking is. Fedora Pro, Master, Member, whatever, if it solves my problem i dont really care. Id just leave the moderator and admin ranks and just get rid of all the rest, but leave the post numbers so ppl can see how much you have posted. All the semi-regulars know who knows their stuff, Foolish, Ug, J-Man, Mhelios (where'd he go anyway?) and all the others who obviously know their stuff. The Ranks to me just seem kind of a waste beyond admin and moderator.

Just my 2 cents, take it with a grain of salt.

BTW, i rather like foolish's Post of the Month idea. Sounds kinda cool.

[crackers]

Originally posted by Ug
So crackers you have some work to do. ;)

Oh, you mean post a bunch of one liners? :D

[jale2ice]

Well, i had a few good ideas for the ranks... but, someone deleted my thoughts in the previous thread and i forgot!

:)

[Gareth]

Yes - I'm guilty.

And crackers this is a two liner.

[Thoreau]

I think the new titles do a better job of telling new people what is going on here.

[egurski]

Mt 2cents is:

Add a post of the month and keep the titles as they are. I may be a newbie to the forum, but I do have over 35 years experience. I am offended by the "newbie" --- absolutely not -- I have aregular job and cannot devote the time to provide answers or advice on everything. However, in my job --- what they pay me for -- I am considered to be very knowledgable.

Titles do't mean anything --- just keep it the way it is...

Keep up the great work....

[fjleal]

crackers wrote:
And can we make the damn reply-fields a bit wider? I feel like I'm typing in a closet!
I don't really care about ranks (sorry if I'm out topic here). I came here (and come almost every day) looking for help, and also willing to help others. That's the spirit. And in what concerns this forums usability, I do think crackers is absolutely right. A wider reply-field would do us much more good than a different ranking system, whatever that may be good for. "Typing in a closet", really... :D

[dragon]

Personally, I think that assessment by other forum members is the best way to assign some sort of title. No system is going to be perfect, but I believe I have an idea which is better than a pure # posts approach.

I would propose a system whereby anyone who replies to a post can also assign a rating (e.g. 0-5 from unhelpful to very helpful) to an original post or any reply before theirs. Only members with at least a minimum number of posts may rate other member's posts. One's ranking could depend on the number of 'helpful' postings one receives (e.g. 25 postings rated helpful = Senior Member, 100 = Fedora Pro, 1000 = Jedi Knight etc.). A posting is considered 'helpful' if say at least 75% of people rating that post give it a 4/5 or 5/5.

This scheme has a number of consequences:
1) Members are rewarded (in rank) by posting helpful responses (rather than simply the # of posts). Members who post howto's can be rewarded for their contribution (as original posts can be rated).
2) Anyone who replies to a post may rate other replies, not just the poster (this partly helps to compensate for newbies and casual users not rating replies).
3) Users viewing a post or its replies could see what other members thought of the post before reading it in depth or trying it out.

An alternative would be to allow anyone who views a thread to assign a rating to posts / replies. This would allow a larger number of users to assess posts, but those who rate but do not actually reply may not have put as much thought into the rating.

[JonR]

It seems to me that ranking by number of posts wherever you draw the lines is about all you can do really. The only refinement I would suggest is to differentiate between 'technical' posts which add value to the community KB and 'social' posts which are just that.

[crackers]

Pssst! That's why there's separate forums... :D

[Jman]

Moved to Suggestions & Feedback.