Are you using the Member Reputation System?

[Nacho]

We are curious to know if the members are using the "Member Reputation System".

If you are, please give us your feedback to let us know what you think.

If you are not, you can read a bit more about it here (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/forum/faq.php?faq=vb_board_usage#faq_new_faq_item) or please tell us why you wish not to use it.

Thanks!

[Dodger]

Yep, this is a good tool.

One question though. I have a couple of Clicks on my rep button. They show up in my control panel -- but they do not tell me if they are Good Clicks or Bad Clicks. They are color coded I guess. What does black mean ? I am not trying to be funny either...but methinks somebody don't like me. :(

Okay...if somebody will click on my rep link right now with a big Approval, then I will know what the colors mean. Please, if everyone will click on it so that I really, really, really know for sure. ;)

[seobook]

I don't really understand it...I just keep getting all of these negative votes :( why does everybody gotta be so hurtful.

be happy and lend a hand. vote happy for me :)

[Dodger]

Don't worry ... be happy !! :D

[polarmate]

It is almost like going back to school - where *you* get graded for what you write. If a post is a good one, it would make more sense to give a star or a rating to the post rather than the poster. At least, that's how I see it.

[polarmate]

LOL! I just noticed a thread in my user CP that I no longer have access to with the subject 'FREE Legal Wireless Acc...' for which I received my last reputation. There's a black square next to it with no comment so I am guessing someone did not like what I had to say there. Oh well...going to cry in my lonely dark cave... :rolleyes:

[K.S. Katz]

I'm not much into using the reputation tool, because it's solely based on opinion. While it may have checks and balances in place to stop abuse, I'm still not confident that it can't take place.

Also, it gives me the whole "gee I'm back in high school and have to worry about what my peers are thinking" feeling. :( (Note: I was never good at popularity contests, so I avoid them like the plague.)

[Dodger]

From just a few comments only, it does appear that negative reputation is being handed out judiciously while nothing positive is. Oh well, what is that saying "If it wasn't for bad reputation, I wouldn't have any reputation at all". I guess I can live with that.

BTW, you do have the option to disable your reputations in your control panels.

[polarmate]

Yeah, the rep could be disabled but then you'd never find out how much others dislike or hate or envy you!! :D

[rustybrick]

I would really like to see more votes here. If your reading this and you have not voted, please do.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

I think the reputation tool can turn out to be a very good indicator of how much to trust posters. It has proven to work for other kinds of sites so why not here. But, I do think we need more members before we start to see the real value. Also, everyone have to become familiar with it.

Anyway, I think it's a try woth. If it turns out having no real value I am sure the admins will turn it off :)

[AussieWebmaster]

I have given some good feedback for a few people.. though do not know if I have gotten any either way... where do you check?

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

I don't think there is anywhere you can check details about ratings. It may be something to consider ...

[Dodger]

Ratings or Reputation?

For the reputation and comments (optional) you will find them in the first screen of your User Control Panel.

[Anthony Parsons]

I don't really understand it...I just keep getting all of these negative votes :( why does everybody gotta be so hurtful.

be happy and lend a hand. vote happy for me :)

Yer, I reckon you would be about as concerned about it as I am Aaron.......

Like none.

I don't rate the system, my system won't allow me to use it for I have scripts and other things turned off through my system <as discussed with nacho already> so something else can't hurt me and I just couldn't be bothered with it. I would rather just post a quick, nice post, well said or something like that. Words are a better expression to me than a reputation meter.

I turned mine off anyway. Yuk.

[Nacho]

Sorry guys, not to pick on any one in particular, but in general terms. . .

IMHO, I think that users that turn their "Reputation" off is a BAD sign and highly untrustworthy. I heard an analogy from another Moderator when we were discussing about the tool back stage about how it works, where he compared it to the "noarchive META tags" to remove pages from the search engine's cache. Which gives a bad impression of the wrong SEO techniques.

My father has an old saying in Spanish, "Don't do right things, that might appear to be wrong things." Sometimes 'sayings' don't translate exactly, but I hope you get the idea.

<added> Now, Anthony has a very valid point. However, even if you can't use it because of the "BUG", you should still allow other users to rate you and gain reputation. IMO, all the posts I've seen from you are really good, so you shouldn't worry.</added>

[seobook]

IMHO, I think that users that turn their "Reputation" off is a BAD sign and highly untrustworthy. I heard an analogy from another Moderator when we were discussing about the tool back stage about how it works, where he compared it to the "noarchive META tags" to remove pages from the search engine's cache. Which gives a bad impression of the wrong SEO techniques.

I don't think so. Some people just do not like to be rated. It is like registering a domain by proxy. Maybe you just don't want spammed.

My father has an old saying in Spanish, "Don't do right things, that might appear to be wrong things." Sometimes 'sayings' don't translate exactly, but I hope you get the idea.

<added> Now, Anthony has a very valid point. However, even if you can't use it because of the "BUG", you should still allow other users to rate you and gain reputation. IMO, all the posts I've seen from you are really good, so you shouldn't worry.</added>

At the end of the day people reading threads can usually tell who is not welcome / out to lunch. My personal opinion on grades in school or ratings of any kind are that they might be an interesting novelty BUT I do not much believe in grading systems.

I think I came up with my current philosophy a few months back. People who need grades only need grades because they are either unitelligent or too lazy to find their true calling in life. If you actively learn and apply yourself to something you are interested in then in due time all shall be well.

With that being said, feel free to trade reciprocal or trinagular votes with me. PM me with trade worthy posts :)

[Chris_D]

I think its a good idea, as long as we don't get people setting up reciprocal RLF's (Reputation Link Farms)........

:)

[Dodger]

Ahh, Aaron ... are we branching out into the Rep Broker field now? ;)

[Nacho]

It is like registering a domain by proxy. Maybe you just don't want spammed.

You could still get spammed via these three options on your Profile (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/forum/member.php?u=76):

Home Page:
http:// www. seobook .com
Email:
Send a message via email to seobook
Private Message:
Send a private message to seobook

Reputations are not about spamming or highschool grades, they are just about getting feedback from your fellow members. You have only two options:

What do you think of seobook's post?
I approve
I disapprove

and of course . . . "Your comments on this post" so that you can justify approval or disapproval.

It's not a 0 through 10 score or A+ to D- and F's. It is also not about "I don't like you" or "You are my hero". It is about your post was good because ____ or your post was bad because ____. This feedback is done in private matter, and I think that is the right approach.

Now, how many bars you have for reputation levels is a great idea, because if a member is new to the forum he or she can easily determine who are the right voices to hear and which are not. Doesn't mean he or she will most likely skip the messages, but I'm sure it will be one of the features to watch for. Reputations and Trust can only be earned, it is not something that can be given by number of posts and age in forum.

[seobook]

You could still get spammed via ...your Profile

I did not say that I was concerned with it, (as I still have feedback turned on). And yes, I am aware that there are many types of spam in the world :)

It's not a 0 through 10 score or A+ to D- and F's. It is also not about "I don't like you" or "You are my hero". It is about your post was good because ____ or your post was bad because ____. This feedback is done in private matter, and I think that is the right approach.

I think the contextual citation (or text associated with the feedback) should be manditory. A justification for reasoning of approval / disapproval. Give you a few examples.

Ebay:
When you buy something off ebay most of the feedbacks say something like
"prompt shipment, item better than I could have ever imagined, smooth transaction"
those are far more valuable than "yes" or "no"

Enquire:
When Tim Berners Lee started creating his first non linear software application to organize the information within CERN he required that new pages (or nodes) had a link back to another page which cited it's relation. It is the foundation of hypertextual non linear network type thinking.

My personal feedback:
so far I got a feedback rating of 10 and am not entirely sure what that means. the last few comments (as I think of all comments left about me) were non comments. blank feedback.

as you stated above "your post was good because ____ or your post was bad because ____"

those blanks are still blank and something is missing from the context of the feedback

I don't know how I am helping people or what specifically is the good information that really helped somebody. all I know is that it is either good or bad and in a post within a thread. collecting data in such a manner leaves off other meaningful data that would facilitate a faster feedback loop and better post quality.

Now, how many bars you have for reputation levels is a great idea, because if a member is new to the forum he or she can easily determine who are the right voices to hear and which are not. Doesn't mean he or she will most likely skip the messages, but I'm sure it will be one of the features to watch for.

More bars does not always mean better, often it just is an indication of time. In the military a higher rank often meant nothing more than more time in service. Google is known to give newer pages a small boost in rankings until the page has had sufficient time to get linkage feedback.

When these links are evaluated, the text within the links is one of the most important features. I am not saying that a forum rating system necissarily needs to be as advanced as Google per say, but the words describing why something is good or bad take it from a state of randomness of opinion to a tangible relationship.

Also making the feedback function not require any verbiage means that there will be more back scratching type ratings. I think BlackKnight stated that many links are business partnerships.

I know there are certain people who post that make me want to read every single post they write (even though I may not do any sort of business with them). Those people would have a hard time competing with business networks within the seo industry. People are going to be more likely to positively rate other memebers they do business with.

Reputations and Trust can only be earned, it is not something that can be given by number of posts and age in forum.

The current rating system supports people who have many seo business partnerships and friends. The number of friends you have does not directly corrilate to how much you know, or how much you are willing to share that information with others to help them. Helping others is what forums are all about.

[robwatts]

I think its an interesting addition which Ive used once. For me it adds another angle to the whole 'forum' thing. Im still undecided whether its a good thing or a bad thing.

I think it would make more sense, if perhaps there was a way of actually knowing *why* a person had say three green boxes or 2 black ones. Sure, they've received on balance a lot of positive or negative posts, but many of these 'votes' are based on subjective opinion, which may carry all sorts of loaded baggage such as personal dislike/like, lack of knowledge for the subject itself, etc etc. This hardly gives an objective view and kind of undermines the whole concepts worth, as ultimately we all get different things from different posts, some helpful, and some not so.

The last time I looked, zeal (looksmart) used to have a similar thing in operation, but these werent anonymous, these were actual recorded gripes or praise for zealots/editors.

Personally, i'd like the option to read the comments associated with the reputation, as IMO (should I be suitably motivated to know) it would maybe go someway to help gain a more complete picture of the persons 'track record' although for most of us, we pretty much all know the various forum addicts by their various nicks, but for newbs who dont, then maybe it really could be an important addition to the mix. Post counts were/are a way of measuring involvement/commitment to a forum, but dont exactly mean that because the poster has such volume that they've necessarily made a high % of valued contributions, maybe this rep thing could help shed some light on this ( if it so mattered to the person interested even)

One other thing on the display of comments , the rep thing might well create a lot of silly 'who said this about me' type threads, which could then perhaps have a forum of their own a la 'Karma whinge' or 'Karma Gloat' forum.

Bottom line for me, is that I like the idea, but it could do with a little extra thought/developement, as right now its pretty meaningless.

(side issue: these comments, who can read them? Are they anonymous, or do the admins know who said what about whom , does phpmyadmin reveal all...)

<edit reason> edited for improved clarity</edit>

[Dodger]

Reputations are not about spamming or highschool grades, they are just about getting feedback from your fellow members. You have only two options:

What do you think of seobook's post?
I approve
I disapprove

and of course . . . "Your comments on this post" so that you can justify approval or disapproval.

It's not a 0 through 10 score or A+ to D- and F's. It is also not about "I don't like you" or "You are my hero". It is about your post was good because ____ or your post was bad because ____. This feedback is done in private matter, and I think that is the right approach.

Now, how many bars you have for reputation levels is a great idea, because if a member is new to the forum he or she can easily determine who are the right voices to hear and which are not. Doesn't mean he or she will most likely skip the messages, but I'm sure it will be one of the features to watch for. Reputations and Trust can only be earned, it is not something that can be given by number of posts and age in forum.

You are right. It is not a 0 thru 10 score. It is a simple Yes/No vote. But it is a vote that seemingly only noes are being cast if they take the time. That is what I am experiencing anyway, and so is Aaron as well. So there is a flaw in this type of system.

As you also say "reputations and trust can only be earned", and it does not take a visual reminder to tell people that. And if it has to be earned, why is it that all Admin are set a 3 and Mods at a 2 -- not that I don't mind, but if it is something that has to be earned under this system then wouldn't that just naturally happen any way?

[polarmate]

As you also say "reputations and trust can only be earned", and it does not take a visual reminder to tell people that. And if it has to be earned, why is it that all Admin are set a 3 and Mods at a 2 -- not that I don't mind, but if it is something that has to be earned under this system then wouldn't that just naturally happen any way?
Maybe your answer is here:
Now, how many bars you have for reputation levels is a great idea, because if a member is new to the forum he or she can easily determine who are the right voices to hear and which are not.
;)

[Elisabeth]

You are right. It is not a 0 thru 10 score. It is a simple Yes/No vote. But it is a vote that seemingly only noes are being cast if they take the time. That is what I am experiencing anyway, and so is Aaron as well. So there is a flaw in this type of system.

As you also say "reputations and trust can only be earned", and it does not take a visual reminder to tell people that. And if it has to be earned, why is it that all Admin are set a 3 and Mods at a 2 -- not that I don't mind, but if it is something that has to be earned under this system then wouldn't that just naturally happen any way?

Actually, let me clarify. It is a numerically based system.

Yes does translate to +1
No translates to -1

there's a numerical division between 1, 2 or 3 bars.
Mods & Admins are just as vulnerable to negative votes as the rest of the members. we may have started higher, but that doesn't mean any member can't catch up. it's completely possible.

personally, i watch/read as much as I can, but I don't post 20 times a day. usually just a few. so it's less likely that I'll earn reputation points very quickly compared to a poster making quality contributions every day.

You can now view the entire member list by reputation points, and that helps to see which members are the most trusted.

[Nacho]

Just for fun, at first I thought it was going to be something geeky like this:

Reputation Level = ([# of posts from other members in threads started / # of threads started] + # of own posts in threads started) + # posts per day + # of approved posts given + # of approved posts received + Age in forum + Total Additional Information filled out + Real Age + # of Group Memberships + # of Refferals + Having the guts to show a face in a picture + ([Sum of total Reputation Levels of friends in Buddy List / # of friends in Buddy List] - # of times added to ignore list) + Google PageRank of home page given + Yahoo WebRank of home page given.

Then all of this goes down into brackets for one bar, two bar, three bar . . . I guess 10 bar is the max (right?). I still don't have the anwswer to the max score.

We all know now that it's much more simple than this, but I love algorithms!

Thanks Elisabeth for clarifying the formula for us.

Who knows, maybe one day this formula might work. :)

[Anthony Parsons]

What do you think of seobook's post?
I approve
I disapprove


I think what Aaron is saying is basically how I perceive the rating system, and that is, competent or not competent. That is the system the world works by now, not a grading system on whom is slightly better than whom.

As I have discussed with Nacho about mine not working behind my system, well, I basically turned it off because if I can't rate people, then I don't want to be rated myself. That is my philosophy on my situation. Each to there own IMO.

I think you can start to see some mixed emotions about the system already from the poll. If that is the case, then it is really up to the admin on how they handle it and whether the system remains or not. Me personally, I don't care one way or the other, I just don't use it and don't want it used on me.

If people think that is a bad principle on my behalf, then so be it. But I don't like it and I would say that if others don't like it, then don't be pressured to use it. Turn it off, leave it on, the decision is your choice, that's why the board allows the decision to begin with.

Thanks for the kind words too Nacho.

[dannysullivan]

I basically turned it off because if I can't rate people, then I don't want to be rated myself.

This isn't true, to my understanding. If someone disables reputations, it only means that others can't see the reputation they've earned. People can still wait those with rep display turned off both up and down.

I can tell you that all the comments on the reputation system are appreciated. We do want to help tweak it to be the best it can be. The goal is to help make it easy for those posting excellent material to be recognized. If that goal doesn't work, well, we'll look for another method. But this is where we're starting at.

We will try to make it even more prominent. There are also some other advantages to it, especially with the comments. The ability to quickly send someone negative feedback anonymously might help defuse situations where people sometimes make public slams.

I'd like to emphasize the positive, however. Rather than say to bad rep posts you disagree with, our tone I hope will be to encourage people to reward good stuff. Sort of like the "if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all" mantra many of us heard our parents say. We hope collectively, the rep system will help the very best be more easily seen.

[Dodger]

Danny - Perhaps using the word Reputation is a bad way of explaining this process then. I think possibly changing that link to say Feedback and making it stand out like a sore thumb will get things rolling on it.

[Terry Plank]

I'd like to emphasize the positive, however.
I would to, but I question how many actually do. The tendency seems to be to look at the negative and so if someone has a lower Reputation it is at risk of being viewed as some kind of "objective" measurement rather than a subjective one.

Maybe I'm too jaded in my advancing years. :-)

I think that making it prominant that you can give feedback to a poster and encouraging it is a good idea.

Also making Reputation more prominant if we keep it.

[Terry Plank]

Sorry, a little vague on that "making Reputation more prominant". I meant the request to use Reputation process for evaluating a post.

[dannysullivan]

Danny - Perhaps using the word Reputation is a bad way of explaining this process then. I think possibly changing that link to say Feedback and making it stand out like a sore thumb will get things rolling on it.

We can change the link to say anything. I'd vote instead for "Rate This Post." The reason is that some people may not want to send feedback -- they may assume they have to give their name or there's a lot of work involved. But "Rate This Post" to me sounds like an easy, anonymous thing to do. Plus, it involves a call to action and matches the Rate This Thread messages we already put out.

[paulavery]

Maybe a :) or a :(

When either one is clicked a message box pops up for private feed-back.

Popular opinions are not always the right ones either. So I think when people are rating post I think they should do it based on the persons ability to express themselves, to make a clear argument, and to remain professional. And not on liking the opinion that person holds.

Paul

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

I very much like the term "rate this post" - it is also easy to read (or scan) and understand for readers that are not perfect in english. Often short terms like this can have different meanings in different colutures/countries, but "rate this post" should be pretty straight forward for anyone.

[paulavery]

I would like to qualify this: ability to express themselves

Of course we need to acknowledge that english is not the first language for everyone. So typos and grammer should be ingnored.
Paul

[Nacho]

We can change the link to say anything. I'd vote instead for "Rate This Post."

Brilliant . . . I vote for that too.

[Terry Plank]

Assuming we are keeping with the evaluation process, I too like "Rate This Post".

And make it more prominant than the Reputation graphic there now. If we want it done, we need to make a stronger point of asking for it.

[rustybrick]

So we are saying that we want to change the "(reputation)" link to "(rate this post)" and leave the "Reputation: [] [] []"?

[polarmate]

We can change the link to say anything. I'd vote instead for "Rate This Post." The reason is that some people may not want to send feedback -- they may assume they have to give their name or there's a lot of work involved. But "Rate This Post" to me sounds like an easy, anonymous thing to do. Plus, it involves a call to action and matches the Rate This Thread messages we already put out.
The only difference is that the post is not rated - the poster is. Those are two different objects in the database.

"Rate This Thread" works because the thread is rated. Not the person who started the thread. If you look at the thread, you see the stars. It won't happen with "Rate This Post" ie the post won't get the stars, the poster does. And it is carried with him and displayed as his "Reputation" and bears no relation to the post that people thought they were giving stars/points/whatever to.

Two very different things, IMO.

[Bernard]

Eng-Tips forums (http://www.eng-tips.com/threadhome.cfm) uses their own forum software AFAIK. They have a post rating system that allows members to acknowledge helpful posts (there is no negative voting). The posts display little stars to indicate member votes for it. The poster gets credit towards a site reputation and the voter's voting record is also tracked and publicly available (in aggregate). I like their system much better than vBulletin's Reputation system.

Perhaps the vBulletin system could be tweaked to:

1. Require the comments field be filled when posting (negative?) votes.
2. Show the voting/reputation score for each post as well as each user.
3. Allow members to review all vote comments for a post or a member
4. Allow members to review the voting record (in aggregate) of a member

I would find the system much more meaningful in this event.

[Bernard]

I just checked my CP at another vBulletin forum I frequent and I had a negative vote (black icon) with the comment "Useful information!". LOL!

[Nacho]

Hmmmm.... That doesn't seem right.

I will check with our Systems Admin to see if something like this could be either deleted or reversed if it happend at SEW.

Thanks for the feedback.

[Dodger]

I am getting that here too. Positive comments with a black box. Actually it is not really black ... more like a dark grey.

I do have one green box though...I think it is from this thread. :D

[steve sardell]

This is a new forum, and it appears to me, the vast majority of members are well versed on the subject matters. In fact, it seems to be be a *who's who* of the search engine world. Already there have been some fantastic threads, and many remarkable posts. But, as the forum grows some posts will not be so enlightening. There will be the trolls who pass thru looking to instigate and hoping for a reaction. These may direct the novice members in the wrong direction. As long as the reputation feature is used judiciously, and not open to malicious intent, I see it as a strong feature, one that will make posters think, and give new members an idea of who and what to believe. JMHO

[chris]

As my contribution here let me explain why my reputation thingy is turned off. This is SEO and as we all know there are 10,000 opinions on everything. It occurs to me that whilst reputation/rating systems might work on some boards where the answers are black and white (i.e. you solved my problem or you didn't) it probably doesn't apply to this environment. In this environment the click on the button is more likely to be how much somebody agrees with you or not (note, I didn't say always...just more likely!). Think back through the last few years and I'm sure we can all recall one or two wild theories that were taken up by the majority. That being so, why would anybody want to be rated on how many people agree with them? Isn't such a system also likely to stop somebody posting something that may be useful that people might disagree with? Of course it is. That's why mine's turned off, I don't believe in displaying how much I follow popular theory or not. I've very little interest in having a sheep metric :)

Anybody want to agree with me in return for a reputation click? :D

[hulkster]

My personal feedback:
so far I got a feedback rating of 10 and am not entirely sure what that means. the last few comments (as I think of all comments left about me) were non comments. blank feedback.

FYI: All Puny Humans start out with a score of 10.
If Hulk catch you spamming, Hulk will SMASH down to zero! ;-)

[dannysullivan]

Thanks, everyone! I've now deleted that post from my alternative account used to see things as a member. All your reputation postings helped confirm what I thought.

To recap, the forum system allows people to rate individual posts. Currently, this is done by clicking on the little scales icon or the word "reputation" to the right of the name of the person who posted.

If you go to User Control Panel, you'll see any reputation ratings you've been given in the "Latest Reputation Received" that shows up under the Settings & Options tab.

This area will show a colored icon, a link to the thread where your posting was rated, the date and any comments that were sent along with the rating. You will NOT see the name of the person who sent it.

There are three colored icons: red, green and gray.

Red means someone disapproved of your post and that this had a negative impact on your overall reputation score.

Grean means someone approved of your post and that this had a positive impact on your overall reputation score.

Gray means someone either approved or disapproved of your post and this had NO impact on your score. Why would this happen? Currently, you have to have a certain number of posts before you are allowed to have ratings that impact others.

We're looking at changing the wording of the "reputation" link to perhaps "Rate This Post."

The only difference is that the post is not rated - the poster is. Those are two different objects in the database.

Actually, I'd argue that the post is indeed rated. That rating, of course, is then used to impact on the overall reputation of the person posting.

Ideally, we might have a system that let you rate posts in order to sort the best posts from top to bottom. You might also be able to rate actual people independently of posts. These are things we can consider. For now, I think we'd like to start off slow with the existing system.

Personally, i'd like the option to read the comments associated with the reputation

It's a good idea. In other words, you might be able to view a person's profile page and see all the comments that have been said, sort of like with eBay. Again, something to consider for the future.


Perhaps the vBulletin system could be tweaked to:
1. Require the comments field be filled when posting (negative?) votes.
2. Show the voting/reputation score for each post as well as each user.
3. Allow members to review all vote comments for a post or a member
4. Allow members to review the voting record (in aggregate) of a member

These are all good ideas. And not to sound like a broken record, but something I think we'll look at once the reputation feature gets some degree of track record.

Someone else suggested that perhaps only positive voting should be allowed. I thought about this myself. Personally, I still lean toward letting people be able to say either way. Even better migth be a range of scores, 1-5 like we do with threads. But that's also something we'll have to look at once the system develops.

As you also say "reputations and trust can only be earned", and it does not take a visual reminder to tell people that. And if it has to be earned, why is it that all Admin are set a 3 and Mods at a 2 -- not that I don't mind, but if it is something that has to be earned under this system then wouldn't that just naturally happen any way?

We did set these deliberately higher, but they certainly aren't pushed up to the very top. The mods and admins are watching the forums closely and I think already do carry some degree of reputation because of their positions. This also helps them reach out and reward other members more effectively for good posts. But the bottom line is that they can all be impacted negatively, just like anyone else. Over time, I'm sure you'll see some members with reputations that score higher than moderators -- which I think will be great.

[polarmate]

Actually, I'd argue that the post is indeed rated. That rating, of course, is then used to impact on the overall reputation of the person posting.

Ideally, we might have a system that let you rate posts in order to sort the best posts from top to bottom. You might also be able to rate actual people independently of posts. These are things we can consider. For now, I think we'd like to start off slow with the existing system.
True but under the current system the benefit accrues to the poster and not the post. At least not visually. If there are quality posts in a thread, it would be great if they could be highlighted (with stars?). They become great 'markers' for future reference because they are easy to find on the page once the page has been bookmarked and it is still possible to read these posts without losing the context of the thread, which could happen if posts are sorted according to ratings.

I appreciate the manner in which you deal with feedback.

[dannysullivan]

True but under the current system the benefit accrues to the poster and not the post. At least not visually. If there are quality posts in a thread, it would be great if they could be highlighted (with stars?).

Definitely see the advantage to this, and it may be something that will come as the material in the forums starts to grows.

Right now, we're mainly thread and user oriented. In other words, we have a number of things to help you quickly find good threads or to see all the activity that a particular user did.

As things grow, it may be that you'll want to filter a long thread to see only the key posts. We can probably make this happen initially by letting people filter by reputation -- show me all the posts from those with a certain reputation level, for example.

Going even further would be the ability to see things filtered just by post, as you say. Show me all the top posts across the entire forum, or all the top posts in a thread or so on. We'd have to make further changes for this to happen, but it's definitely something we'd consider.

Overall, that's the goal -- give people plenty of options to slice and dice the forum material in a way that fits them best and even in particular situations. It won't happen all at once, of course.

[paulavery]

Identifying quality post

- if the system could detect which post were linked to and if one post had more than average then the system could flag as a popular post. Taking a page out of Gs book.

Need: Each post to have an anchor. A way for the system to evaluate if that particular link is creating referrer traffic (stats). And then a way to star the post to make it stand out.

Is that wishful thinking?

Paul

[Bernard]

Paul, do you have 50,000 pages at your disposal to link to your advert on SEW Forums?

[paulavery]

would 25K do?
:)

[hulkster]

Gray means someone either approved or disapproved of your post and this had NO impact on your score. Why would this happen? Currently, you have to have a certain number of posts before you are allowed to have ratings that impact others.



Great summary Danny - one question.

I just checked and I actually have a one "grey" box that attaches to a post I made ... so while I understand what you wrote above, perhaps you can clarify exactly what "certain number of posts" means - I assume this is in reference to the rater, not the ratee (?)

Thanx,
alek

[Dodger]

I just checked and I actually have a one "grey" box that attaches to a post I made ... so while I understand what you wrote above, perhaps you can clarify exactly what "certain number of posts" means - I assume this is in reference to the rater, not the ratee (?)


You are right on the number of posts that the rater has will determine whether you get the green or red dot. I am guessing right now, based on what I have seen -- it is above 20 posts and less than 80.

What Danny did not make clear though, is even though they are "grey" -- Do they still qualify towards reputation? I am assuming that they do not.

I also noticed that the one Green dot on my record had a point value attached to it. I am suspecting that the higher the rep level of the rater, the more points you get from approval votes (and vice-versa) ???? If so -- Danny you have a great thing going here buddy (major sucking up time now...hehehe) Keep up the good work!!!

[Bernard]

Do gray boxes eventually turn red or green (when the voter meets the threshold criteria), or is an opinion cast early completely worthless?

[dannysullivan]

I just checked and I actually have a one "grey" box that attaches to a post I made ... so while I understand what you wrote above, perhaps you can clarify exactly what "certain number of posts" means - I assume this is in reference to the rater, not the ratee (?)
That's right. The person rating has to have a certain number of posts before they can cast a rating that has an impact on you. I won't put the exact number out there, because it might change. But Dodger's range is very good.

I'm curious what level you think posting should have an impact, so I've started a new thread/poll (http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/forum/showthread.php?t=349) on that.

What Danny did not make clear though, is even though they are "grey" -- Do they still qualify towards reputation? I am assuming that they do not.
That's my assumption, as well. Honestly can't say for certain, sorry. I also doubt that gray votes will retroactively turn green or red.

I also noticed that the one Green dot on my record had a point value attached to it. I am suspecting that the higher the rep level of the rater, the more points you get from approval votes

So to be clear, I think you mean that you have only one green vote. That vote shouldn't be showing a specific value. However, you can guess at what it is by looking at your reputation score. Sounds like you've noticed you moved up from the 10 points that everyone starts with to something higher, say 11, 13, 15 or even 20.

Exactly how much a vote is worth is complicated. The higher the rep of the person voting, plus I believe number of posts and time as a member, all comes into play. Ugh, does sounds like PageRank, doesn't it!

The whole thing is designed to provide some checks and balances. As always, can't say it is perfect now or that it will ever be. But it's a starting point.

[Dodger]

Exactly how much a vote is worth is complicated. The higher the rep of the person voting, plus I believe number of posts and time as a member, all comes into play. Ugh, does sounds like PageRank, doesn't it!


Yes it does sound a little like PageRank. I think it will be a good game to play here at SEW trying to figure it out. It would be a pleasant diversion, and a lot less stressful to boot. And I think I am getting a pretty good handle on it now, so excuse me .... gotta run and get some more Rep Appeal. Never stop. :D

[Nacho]

I'm curious. How many of the 8 voters for "No. I've seen it, tried it, but don't like it. " following this discussion have changed their mind?

[seobook]

I'm curious. How many of the 8 voters for "No. I've seen it, tried it, but don't like it. " following this discussion have changed their mind?

I bet many of those 8 have not followed the thread to this point.

[polarmate]

I was one of those 8. Still have not changed my mind. :)

[dstew]

I'm skipping to the end without reading the rest of these posts. Typically, I don't have the time to read every single post, much less have time to give someone a rating. I think it's juvenile to boot. I could care less how "popular" someone is. I rate them on their individual post.

The only situation where I can think it might be useful is if someone really doesn't know what they're doing, and is trying to seek specific advice and two people respond with totally opposite opinions. Then they could go with the person's advice who has the best rating.

Other than that, I'm completely ambivalent to one's rating.

[I, Brian]

I've never been keen on the reputation system - the fact that people are allowed to make private anonymous comments *at you*, rather than to your face, makes it rather unwelcome.

If someone has something unpleasant to say, they are welcome to say it to my face. I'll never say anything behind anyone's back, so it's disappointingwhen the courtesy is not returned.

I've used reputation for good posts a couple of times, but most of the time the user should be engrossed in the content of the post, not sitting back and thinking of what private and anonymous comments they can grade the poster with.

Generally, reputation seems a good idea on teenage sites where groups of friends want to affirm their adolescent bonds with one another - but on a board with grown ups, I'd prefer we'd all be grown-up, and keep everything in the open, or not at all, thanks.

2c.

[Nacho]

I've never been keen on the reputation system - the fact that people are allowed to make private anonymous comments *at you*, rather than to your face, makes it rather unwelcome.
Sounds fair.

So, if you had the comments made linked to the member who rated your post, then you would be OK with the system, is this correct?

[JohnScott]

I think the reputation thing is open to abuse, and therefore not a good idea.

My 2 cents.

[Nacho]

I think the reputation thing is open to abuse, and therefore not a good idea.
Just like SEO, email and just about anything, it's always open to abuse. However, to this date we have not received any important complaints from our Members that have been using it for well over 1 to 4 months. We have received very positive feedback on it and we have also noticed that Members get very comfortable with the system after the first few times using rating posts and receiving feedback on their own (all ethically, of course).

Give it a try :)

[I, Brian]

Sounds fair.

So, if you had the comments made linked to the member who rated your post, then you would be OK with the system, is this correct?
That could certainly be an improvement - though if someone is to make a comment, why not simply post approval/disapproval in public?

Reputation has some admirable aims, but I'm sure not it can deliver what people imagine it should deliver - a measure of a person's worth to a community. That's just my uncharismatic 2c's, though.

[AussieWebmaster]

Out of interest how many rep posts do you have Nacho? Is that how you received the added green bar? Is it set up as an auto thing?
Just curious... the only bars I look for are the ones that serve beer!

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

I got the added green bar too. It's easy, you just pay Elisabeth. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's 299 a year per dot. I could only afford one extra :D

[AussieWebmaster]

I got the added green bar too. It's easy, you just pay Elisabeth. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's 299 a year per dot. I could only afford one extra :D
Hey must be for long standing service... or you are the sergants to our corporals!

[rustybrick]

Yea, just slip a few dollars and you got the 3rd green bar. Its that easy. :D

[Nacho]

Out of interest how many rep posts do you have Nacho? Is that how you received the added green bar?
Ok, if you guys promise to not say anything I'll share the algorithm . . . . Shhhhh! :D

Reputation Level = ([# of posts from other members in threads started / # of threads started] + # of own posts in threads started) + # posts per day + # of approved posts given + # of approved posts received + Age in forum + Total Additional Information filled out + Real Age + # of Group Memberships + # of Refferals + Having the guts to show a face in a picture + ([Sum of total Reputation Levels of friends in Buddy List / # of friends in Buddy List] - # of times added to ignore list) + Google PageRank of home page given + Yahoo WebRank of home page given.

Now, if you can figure out each element, you'll know how I got the three bars. :p

If you can't figure it out, then give me an "Approve" rating and I'll tell you. ;)

[rustybrick]

Reputation Level = ([# of posts from other members in threads started / # of threads started] + # of own posts in threads started) + # posts per day + # of approved posts given + # of approved posts received + Age in forum + Total Additional Information filled out + Real Age + # of Group Memberships + # of Refferals + Having the guts to show a face in a picture + ([Sum of total Reputation Levels of friends in Buddy List / # of friends in Buddy List] - # of times added to ignore list) + Google PageRank of home page given + Yahoo WebRank of home page given.


If it were only that simple... ;)

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Money is simple :)

[Dodger]

If you can't figure it out, then give me an "Approve" rating and I'll tell you. ;)

That is this button right? :D
http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/images/buttons/report.gif

[Nacho]

. . . Lol :D

[Dodger]

Oh boy! I knew that one would get a smile out of you.

Most of my good rep hits have come from this thread. I am going to take SeoBooks words to heart and become more specialized and narrow in focus to maximize ROI on my posts, therefore I am making this thread my main focus at SEW until I have cornered the rep market on it.

Other threads of focus, but not limited to, will be other heated debates where there is no clear middleground. I will choose the side with the most rep to hand out and go with them regardless of my true stance. There will be major sucking up and kudos for that lucky group to be sure -- taking care not to unsettle the other group and avoid declines in rep points.

I will be offering an eBook on RPO (rep point optimization) in the near future, and hopefully it will be a hot seller so I can retire. Affiliateships will only be available to those who smack my rep button right now and with lots of good remarks too. :D

[seobook]

I will be offering an eBook on RPO (rep point optimization) in the near future, and hopefully it will be a hot seller so I can retire. Affiliateships will only be available to those who smack my rep button right now and with lots of good remarks too. :D

major questions from the gallery...if we recently voted for you shall we perhaps vote for tons of other people so that we can redistribute a second? and perhaps third vote for you?

with all the votes you must be getting how will you track them? mySQL? a java counter? an abacus (http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=abacus)?

will you be doing a live reading of your ebook?
perhaps at burning man (http://www.burningman.com/)? hope to see ya there...

[Nacho]

Dodger,

That's got to be one of the best posts I've seen in The Padded Room. I'll buy your book, but can you make a print version for me and sign it? :D

I wish you the best success in everything you do.

Saludos,

Nacho

[Dodger]

major questions from the gallery...if we recently voted for you shall we perhaps vote for tons of other people so that we can redistribute a second? and perhaps third vote for you?

It is obvious that you read my previous work "Pyramidding to RPO Success". Yes, very astute of you Aaron. I also advise that in your comments to your second-tier clients that you include a good rep-back to me. This way I can pass my RR down to you as a reward.

with all the votes you must be getting how will you track them? mySQL? a java counter? an abacus (http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=abacus)?

No. None of the above. I do it the tried and true way that has been used for many generations in my family -- fingers (http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=finger+puppets). This is much more advantageous, for my figures are always at hand.

A lot of people use this method too. Have you ever noticed that a lot of people are counting to the number three when you cut them off at the end of the off-ramp? I usually smile and count to eight right back at em.

will you be doing a live reading of your ebook?
perhaps at burning man (http://www.burningman.com/)? hope to see ya there...

Unfortunately no. I saw Orson Welles recite Jabberwocky on TV once upon a time when I was just a young lad. Public readings have been very scary for me ever since, that dude scarred me for life.

That's got to be one of the best posts I've seen in The Padded Room. I'll buy your book, but can you make a print version for me and sign it?

Why sointantly! And I will do you one better. You buy 2 of them and I will throw in an extra eBook for free, no charge even. Act now, and I will pay for the shipping too.