flexxskins Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I guess that I am kind of slow and therefore need some type of brief explanation as to how this is supposed to work. For instance, no offense to the original poster, but the neighboring grass thread...well, kind of sucks IMO. So why does it already have 3 rating stars? Are people just diggin the thread that much?I guess no one was going to help my dumb ass out as to how this thing is really supposed work. But that's ok, as I read on I figured it out and it is pretty simple. I guess people are diggin the grass thread then. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkforhall Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Smoot thread only had 25 people participate in it, but it's a 4 star thread, didn't lead to much of a "discussion" either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Smoot thread only had 25 people participate in it, but it's a 4 star thread, didn't lead to much of a "discussion" either.Thus my confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 15, 2007 Author Share Posted March 15, 2007 Guys, In depth discussion threads are not the only ones that have to be highly rated. Threads that just make people feel good and laugh can be the same. Threads that make people sad, like the death of Wayne, can be there. It is the mood of the thread and the room. What is well rated is individual. The dream thread was going to be a 1 rating for me after reading the first post, but, after reading a few funny one liners, I gave it a three. A "delete me" thread that becomes, "Hot Asian babes you'd love to fu....talk to," might make it. It just depends on what is going on, when people enter it and the like. That's the potential good of the thing. Not every "good" thread meets a set criteria. In fact, NO thread does. You make it what you feel it is and that feel will change as you evolve, feel good, angry, sick whatever. It's merely a way to help people identify topics of interest versus those that are not as interesting to some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkforhall Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Thus my confusion. I started a thread a long time ago, led to hardly any discussion and a little bit of participation, maybe it was a great 4 or 5 type thread. I feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I find it a bit offputting right now, but I'll get used to it. I do wonder why all threads are Generals. Shouldn't a couple of threads be colonels. I know a couple of mine that have deserved the bird and no stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsWizCubsDukes Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 :doh:If I could only start new threads... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 :doh:If I could only start new threads... Check your PMs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I find it a bit offputting right now, but I'll get used to it. I do wonder why all threads are Generals. Shouldn't a couple of threads be colonels. I know a couple of mine that have deserved the bird and no stars. Now that's the kind of post that can up a thread's rating. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I like this! Can we get :pooh: symbols for really crappy threads? Great idea there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 It's a useless idea... and the results are showing themselves. People don't know how to vote for threads. I haven't read the whole thread so this may have been suggested and dismissed already, but how about limiting thread rating privileges to a few people...the mods for example. Or maybe the mods and 20 or so regular posters that have proven to be a cut above. I don't know what the number should be but a limited and trusted pool should address Die Hard's concerns. With the explosion of new threads over the past few years I can see how this tool can help elevate the quality of threads and steer conversation in the right direction. Thank you for trying the rating system out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Unfortunately stars wont stop the "1" star posts from happening. Its just going to get a ton of "1" star votes. I'm also sure it won’t stop others from telling someone how stupid their thread is when they don’t like the post for any reason. As for only a few getting to use the system...bad idea. Some of the "real intellectuals" around here really don’t care for some of the direct and to the point answers that some of us feel are appropriate. I personally don’t feel the need to write a 1000000 word essay to make my point that Lavar is injury prone and overrated. I'm also pretty content with using words with no more than 5 or 6 letters; other may deem that as unintelligent.:2cents: I'm not necessarily bashing the idea, hell anything at this point cant hurt, but I definitely see some of the downside as well. Give it a shot and if it gets out of control it's just as easy to remove.:logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 This thread sucks! j/k great idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Damnit Art! This is inexcusable. Stars are for Cowboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselPwr44 Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 I always thought descriptive thread titles combined with amount of post pages were a pretty good indicator in making the decision as to what's good to read and what's not? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Hey Art, I just wanted you to know I gave this thread 5 stars because I agree (not really). And not because the content of the post or discussion is of any value. Seems like everyone else is doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blondie Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Are the stars averaged? Let's say........I give a thread 3 stars......and 10 give it 2 and 5 give it 4. How does this work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 cool :gaintsuck :eaglesuck :dallasuck :applause: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 16, 2007 Author Share Posted March 16, 2007 I always thought descriptive thread titles combined with amount of post pages were a pretty good indicator in making the decision as to what's good to read and what's not?:whoknows: Sometimes. Other times it's dozens of pages of people hammering an idiot. The main advantage to rating systems is you can come in after a long day and sort by rating and perhaps sit down with some of the better threads of the day at the top rather than scrolling through others to find it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 16, 2007 Author Share Posted March 16, 2007 DH and Blondie. This thread has 75 votes for a 3.65 average rating. The system rounds up. You can see how many votes and the average by hovering over the stars for a moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Frankly, a rating system should be meaningful to the people who take the time to vote. If people rate the Smoot thread a 5, even if it something we may not, it probably means the rating system is working exactly as anticipated. It identifies what the community feels are good posts and posts it wants to focus on. Without comment as to our individual preferences which tend a bit differently, the rating system is not supposed to reflect what you and I think, but, what the community thinks. Good point there. People that rate are the people that are going to use it, and thus if the stars is a service for them, then it should reflect their opinions on threads. That said, I think at least some consideration might be given to who can rate. It is something to think about, giving only higher members rating privledges(maybe given with how long they have been members) to rate, and new members no ability to rate. Might work, might not. Also, there should be an expected abnormal period. Anytime something new is introduced, there is an adjustment period, and thus things will not happen as expected. For instance, the new rating system may tend to get unused, or misused, or both. Why? Because its new. Things have to settle down to get a real feel for how well it is working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 One thing people will want to keep in mind on this ... all it takes is one poster to rate a thread. So don't assume a five-star thread necessarily means Jason Campbell's in there taking questions live, or that a one-star thread is a drive-by troll's "Skinz suk" debut. Case in point: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193056 That thread has over 50 replies and over 2500 views. Two people have voted, and thus given it it's average rating. So just a tip: if, like some have suggested, you're intending to choose what to read or not read based on these ratings, do yourself a favor and at least hover your pointer over the stars on a thread for a couple seconds before making that call, and see exactly what kind of sample it's based on. Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reic Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Does this mean I get my mysterious No New Threads title taken away from me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsman4u Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 “Redskin fan here coming in from Afghanistan (fragment). “ Art this will be great but I'm just an Ol country boy from D.C. and even worse South East at that, so you know I'm confused (joke). Can you provide more guidance? How do you order a thread to be ranked so it will appear at the top of your forum and others not so popular aren't seen. But again I'm "Kuntry" with a K from D.C. so you know I'm confused. Sorry for dumb question. People on my staff are hovering around my shoulder going wow now that's a great thread...I'm like come on join around the camp fire, we have plenty of room for more Redskin fans! Where am I located? I'm in Bagram, Afghanistan in a Joint Operations Center. Who's here? Koreans, Poland’s, Egyptians, Netherlands, British, Australia is also here but just a myriad of coalition forces are here. Don't suppose you'll have time to respond to this post after all you are a Mega Super Mod! Not sarcasm. Just wondering if you could provide more guidance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obiemills Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Art, you got a 5 star rating from me and my undying gratitude. This is an excellent move. Thank you, thank you, and thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.