Technical and Social rep points.

[3v0]

For you consideration:

In another thread we were talking about the usefulness of rep system. It was suggested that it be split rep into social and technical.

Technical rep point would be awarded for technical merit and social for everything else.

Rep in "Members Lounge" and other non technical areas would only affect peoples social rep.

 

[Pommie]

The current system appears to be completely useless. Complete newbies seem to be able to get full rep on a couple of positive reputations. There are people here with full reputation and a very poor knowledge of electronics or programming. This is not only useless but could be dangerous.

Mike.

 

[MrAl]

Hi,

I cant find the thread. Where is it?

 

[3v0]

Hi,

I cant find the thread. Where is it?

Thanks for pointing out the bad link. It should work now.

 

[alec_t]

I have to agree with Pommie. The system is too open to abuse. A complete idiot (you know the type; he gets status from collecting as many 'Friends' as possible on Facebook) can get get his mates (or aliases) to post high praise and +1 on any rubbish he posts.
I think it would be improved if only the mods could add rep.

 

[3v0]

I would not want to add that to the mods work load.

 

[alec_t]

Point taken. In that case I see no value in having the rep system at all. Shame, because if it were a reliable indicator of technical competence then it would be useful.

 

[Ian Rogers]

For you consideration:

In another thread we were talking about the usefulness of rep system. It was suggested that it be split rep into social and technical.

Technical rep point would be awarded for technical merit and social for everything else.

Rep in "Members Lounge" and other non technical areas would only affect peoples social rep.

Sorry... I don't entirely agree... Reputation is based solely on help.... Whether social or technical. Anyone's help is valuable, so I would leave it alone...

Its only my opinion...

 

[jpanhalt]

We can probably all agree the current system is useless and is getting worse. I think it is also counter productive. When I see an individual with a long history of productivity here who has less the the maximum undecasquare, I have bumped him, and of course, did it anonymously.

First, what is the purpose of rep points? There used to be a description that said in effect that rep was awarded for technical merit of the contribution. Thus, when a newbie awarded rep, fewer point were added on the assumption that the advice/help was not as technically sophisticated. On the other hand, when someone with many squares awarded rep, many more points were added on the assumption the contribution must have really been something. I cannot find that description anymore, but we are left with its flawed effects:
1) The basic premise is wrong. For example, people with many squares in analog may be complete newbies in digital. So, when such a person gets help finding out what "$" means in a program, should they be able to award a heavy load of points?
2) Knowing the effect of having many squares, some conscientious members may be inhibited from awarding points for help they got, but which they feel may be too simple to justify the awarding of a large number of points.

I think the purpose of rep should reflect the substantive contributions made by an individual over time to the technical merit of the forum.

Second, what should the characteristics of rep be? I don't believe it should try to represent to quality of contributions to the extent it does today. What is enormously helpful to one individual may be obvious to another. Does that change the merit of the contribution? I don't think so. (I do think that the moderators should have authority to award points for particularly meritorious contributions. That is part of the detatils that need to be worked out.)

Thus, I think that the award of rep needs to be far more objective than it is today.

Third, I do not think members should be able to award negative rep. Negative rep should be handled by a report to moderation, which will make the ultimate decision.

Fourth, I do not think there should be rep for non-technical contributions. That is the role for Facebook and other social media. I see no legitimate purpose for it on this forum.

SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS:

1) Award a certain number of points per post in a technical forum. That number should be fixed at something like 1 to 3. Questions and answers should both get points. Questions get points, because they stimulate the forum. Again, as for all my suggestions, moderators will have the ability to correct abuses.

2) Non-technical forums should have no points associated with them.

3) Each post, except the original, should have a "helpful" button. That will award an additional number of points, say 2 to 4 points for each hit. NB, the ratio of helps to posts is a control indicator for abusive posting (See #4 below).

4) I believe the ratio of number helped to number of posts is a useful indicator of a members contributions and should be shown. Whether total rep is displayed as green boxes or just numbers doesn't matter to me.

5) I think providing helpful links should be awarded points.* Some members never provide links or citations to support their assertions, others do it far more often. In technical and academic settings, providing appropriate citations to support one's work is required. In fact, the more one knows of a subject, the more links he will often provide. I don't think we should strive for that level of documentation, but I do think that those who take the time to do it should be rewarded. The system needs to be automated, and I am not sure this forum can do that. In terms of perspective, I think 1 to 2 points per link would be appropriate.

6) Longevity on the forum should be recognized. That recognition may or may not get points. I am pretty neutral on that aspect. If points are awarded for longevity, the number per day should be small. For example, if a post gets 3 points, then one day of longevity should get no more than 1 point.

I would be delighted to work with a small group on refining a proposal for our rep system. One major hurdle will be converting from the present to the new system without hurting people. I think that is doable if egos are put aside.

Thank you, 3v0 for starting this thread.

Regards,

John

Edit: *Links should be extended to include almost any attachment, such as illustration, program code, schematic, etc.

 

[3v0]

Once a member gets a lot of rep points anybody he gives rep to gets a lot of points. I would like the option of giving fewer points.

 

[Vizier87]

Just prodding around guys.
I'm perhaps of help in this forum only around 10% of the time. 70% would be my own questions on technical stuff and the rest is just for good measure.

As for the rep I received, being in this forum for 3 years, and getting to know a few great members personally, I felt that it is quite a nice thing to have although I know I'm not the alpha ETO-tron here. It makes me feel like I do belong here.

Hope that provided some perspective...
Vizier87

 

[DerStrom8]

Once a member gets a lot of rep points anybody he gives rep to gets a lot of points. I would like the option of giving fewer points.

I like having the rep system--it's very useful in determining whether a response to a thread comes from a credible source or not. I think it's important to have that basis on which to make decisions. However, I completely agree with you, 3v0, in that members with higher rep should be able to choose the number of rep points. IMHO I don't think anyone (whether they have full rep or not) should be able to give more than three bars at one time to any given member. I've +1'd newbies before for a good post, and it gave them 4-5 bars, just from one click. I don't think this is an effective way of choosing reputation.

I have also seen total idiots here (I'm not trying to be rude, but simply trying to make a point) who don't know a single thing about electronics. However, they state their opinions as fact in such a confident manner that it makes other newbies think he knows what he's talking about. He's created a group of "followers" who constantly boost his rep, when he certainly doesn't deserve it. He's still as ignorant and useless as when he started. I'm sure most of you know who I'm talking about specifically, but I have seen it happen with a few different members.

I think newbies should only be able to give 1 bar maximum at any given time, people with good reputation up to 2, and people with excellent reputation up to 3. I think it would be a much more effective way of showing one's reliability.

P.S. I also don't mean to be hypocritical. If someone feels I have not earned the rep I have, please remove it. I strive to be reliable, but I do not wish to mislead anyone.

 

[tvtech]

I like having the rep system--it's very useful in determining whether a response to a thread comes from a credible source or not. I think it's important to have that basis on which to make decisions. However, I completely agree with you, 3v0, in that members with higher rep should be able to choose the number of rep points. IMHO I don't think anyone (whether they have full rep or not) should be able to give more than three bars at one time to any given member. I've +1'd newbies before for a good post, and it gave them 4-5 bars, just from one click. I don't think this is an effective way of choosing reputation.

I have also seen total idiots here (I'm not trying to be rude, but simply trying to make a point) who don't know a single thing about electronics. However, they state their opinions as fact in such a confident manner that it makes other newbies think he knows what he's talking about. He's created a group of "followers" who constantly boost his rep, when he certainly doesn't deserve it. He's still as ignorant and useless as when he started. I'm sure most of you know who I'm talking about specifically, but I have seen it happen with a few different members.

I think newbies should only be able to give 1 bar maximum at any given time, people with good reputation up to 2, and people with excellent reputation up to 3. I think it would be a much more effective way of showing one's reliability.

P.S. I also don't mean to be hypocritical. If someone feels I have not earned the rep I have, please remove it. I strive to be reliable, but I do not wish to mislead anyone.

I agree with all above.

My Rep power needs to be limited. Or, at least, I can choose how much to give a certain individual...
Not me being blown away with giving an innocent little Rep..and then being totally surprised at how much Rep I have given..to someone who was not worthy of anything really. Except one little added Green Box.

And I have to say this: I am sure there are many, many, steadfast and reliable and accurate Members here that have worked their BUTTS off to make this Forum what it is. Eric comes to mind. Nigel too. And all other accurate contributors out there. Really too many to mention here......

Boncuck comes to mind.
Mr RB comes to mind.
Mr Al comes to mind.
Alec comes to mind..

And so on. You see. I only just started. Love you all.

We SPEAK THE TRUTH only. That is what makes ETO special.

Best regards,
tvtech

 

[MrAl]

Hi,


An interesting idea would be to make the points equate to how many characters appear in the members posts in totality. So person A who wrote 100 posts with a total of 5000 characters gets less 'rep' than one who wrote 50 posts with a total of 10000 characters. I know this might sound strange at first, but any 'rep' has to be a indication of something that says something truly meaningful even though it's still an approximation of sorts. Then any user can look at the number of posts and compare that to the number of characters and get an idea what this member is contributing. In the above, we would have:
1. 100 posts, 5k total characters, average 50 chars per post.
2. 50 posts, 10k characters, average 200 chars per post.
I think that gives an interesting scope on the member's contributions.
A time derivative could also be calculated:
1. 500 characters per day
2. 10 characters per day

A true 'rep' could only come from a panel of experts that reviews each post for technical content, clarity, accuracy, etc., and that would be very hard to get for free these days. So in the search for something else which is not as perfect as that, i think counting the number of text characters is one way to go.

For example, which of these deserves more 'rep':

1. A resistor opposes electrical current and we can calculate the voltage across the resistor knowing the current from: E=I*R.

2. A resistor opposes electrical current and we can calculate the voltage across the resistor knowing the current from: E=I*R, and the power from P=I^2*R or P=V^2/R.

Obviously the one with the more characters is slightly more informative so deserves more rep points.

This wont always be the case:
1. E=I*R
2. E=I*R, and that's the name of that tune!

The technical merit is pretty much the same here even though the number of characters is different, but perhaps there is a workaround for this inherent problem. Also, questions might have to be handled differently.

At the very least this would be interesting statistics on any member which could be printed along with the 'rep' using even another method. So we'd see:
Member Name
Rep Points
Posts: 4321
Chars: 330k
Avg: 76 chars per post

So this says that this member made over 4000 posts but only averages 76 characters per post.

Just some ideas.

 

[jpanhalt]

It is pellucidly obvious (I would have said clearly, but pellucidly gets more points) what is wrong with simply counting characters.

Given the choice, I am glad a man of few words, Lincoln, won the election in 1860 over his opponent Douglas. It shouldn't take a novel to answer a simple question simply.

Just as an aside, my comment was 54 lines, yours was only 36. So, I guess you agree mine is more valuable.

John

 

[MrAl]

Hello John,


What apparently is NOT clearly obvious is that there is NO perfect system for something like this other than bringing in a panel of experts to critique each and every post and take a vote and render a 'rep' value.

I already made the point that the system would not be perfect, but it is still a system that tells us more than what we knew before that. I also stated that it might be better to come up with another way for the 'rep' but still include the number of characters and the average as an additional set of data for the readers convenience. I dont think counting lines would work though because that's not the same as counting characters.

Also, you cant look at one post and decide this way or that. You have to look at a lot of posts over a longer time frame to get an idea how this would work out in the long run. That's part of the beauty of it. Reputable members will come back and post time and time again, while others will post a few times and that's it.

As i said i know it's not perfect but it would be very interesting to compare stats for all the members and have it available right under their name.

As you probably know, a heuristic approach isnt something that has a set perfect formula, but is still a way to go about something that is more complex than we can analyze perfectly right away. It's going to fail sometimes, but then that can lead to improvements as we think of ways to make it work better over time.

My observations have been that i've noticed that some members type only a few lines and other type many many lines. It's obvious to me that the members that type many many characters are trying harder to add to the content and aid whatever question has come up. So the ones that try harder should be rewarded i think.

 

[jpanhalt]

I did not miss your point. Your approach is simply wrong and without empirical merit, in my opinion. There are some people who use lots of words to say nothing and others who think more clearly and are able to answer a question completely in a few words. I suspect that if one actually studied successful scientists and engineers, one would fine an inverse relationship between words and content.

I think what is being looked for is an objective way to assess contributions. Help given should be just one of the metrics. If you look empirically at another forum ( EDA Board) that has a detailed rep system -- one that is rarely complained about -- you will see that the obvious helpers have about one "help" for every 3 or 4 posts, maybe 5 at the most. Others have a ratio of 1:10 or more. That distinction is pretty clear.

As for grading help based on the perceived electronic knowledge of the recipient -- the system we have -- I see no basis in that. If need be, I can provide specific instances where a good joke or cheeky comment got maximum rep form an 11-green-square person.* No technical issue was in question. But that action would make the discussion far more personal. Let's keep it above that.

Let me ask you,which is more important, helping a poor man (a person with one green square) or helping a rich man (a person with 11 green squares)? One could argue that it depends on the relative importance of the question to the man. That is something we can never know here. So, I think all help should be counted equally. Doing so also dilutes the effect of awarding help points frivolously.

John

*In each case, the awarder made it clear he was giving the points. Why? Is that way of asking for a reciprocal favor?

 

[MrAl]

Hello,


You say you didnt miss my point but you used that same point in your argument, when i already acknowledged that.

So by your standard we should remove the number of posts too because that has no bearing on the technical merits. Someone could come in here and post 100 posts that dont say much at all and get that much added to their number of posts count.

The number of posts is interesting, and so would be some other simple statistics. Statistics are always appreciated in some way or another.

 

[DerStrom8]

Hello,


You say you didnt miss my point but you used that same point in your argument, when i already acknowledged that.

So by your standard we should remove the number of posts too because that has no bearing on the technical merits. Someone could come in here and post 100 posts that dont say much at all and get that much added to their number of posts count.

The number of posts is interesting, and so would be some other simple statistics. Statistics are always appreciated in some way or another.

Seeing the number of posts gives the reader an idea of how long a member has been here, or how active he/she has been. It by no means indicates experience level.

I respectfully disagree with your feeling that more characters means more information. I think that method would be even less reliable than the system we currently use. It has maybe a 50-50 chance of working, which to be perfectly honest, is not good enough for me. I don't see how it would really do the forum any good.

Just my opinion, anyway.

 

[MrAl]

Hello,

Well it's not as cut and dry as it seems. For example, if you saw a member with 10 Gigachars and another with 10k chars, it literally HAS to mean something. And as i have said all along, i know already that it is not perfect. But that's what this thread is for, discussing what might help
Nothing at all doesnt help.