|
#1
02-12-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Karma System - trial phase
No comment.
Last edited by RealBlackStuff; 03-16-2007 at 06:04 AM. 
|
|
#2
02-12-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi RBS.
The reputation and thread rating system was only introduced today. We are all starting from scratch, hence the reason for you and I as well as most other members have no rating as yet. Hopefully, Julio will make an announcement in due course. Regards Howard 
|
| You can remove this banner by registering, join the TS Community for free. |
|
|
|
|
#4
02-12-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
Also I think it is worth noting that initially, until people start getting several votes under their belt, the rankings are going to fluctuate wildly. So no reason to get upset and throw a tantrum if you are in the red.
|
|
#5
02-12-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
No comment.
Last edited by RealBlackStuff; 03-16-2007 at 06:04 AM.
|
|
#6
02-12-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
We are still trying to figure out the system... we were all supposed to start from scratch but suddenly reputation points went through the roof, so please bear with us. The idea was to make it a good feature for everyone.
|
|
#7
02-12-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't know who gave me my green rating, but thx
Last edited by kitty500cat; 02-13-2007 at 06:25 PM.
|
| You can remove this banner by registering, join the TS Community for free. |
|
|
|
|
#8
02-13-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
No comment.
Last edited by RealBlackStuff; 03-16-2007 at 06:05 AM.
|
|
#9
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
It does serve a purpose.
The intent is for people to rate the post, and therefore over time a person's ranking becomes a loose indicator of how trustworthy the advice given is. If we have a member that continually offers shoddy advice their rating will be lower than one that consistently gives poor advice. There are restrictions on the ratings too so it would be very difficult to abuse the system. The terms are at the default ones so far and can be changed and likely will. Rarely are things ever perfect when they first get implemented, and this will no doubt see some changes in how it works. If you don't like it then just ignore it. Quote:
Last edited by SNGX1275; 02-13-2007 at 08:17 PM.
|
|
#10
02-13-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
No comment.
Last edited by RealBlackStuff; 03-16-2007 at 06:05 AM.
|
|
#11
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
How does it work?
Quote:
|
|
#12
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
There is a limit on how many in a 24 hour period.
Also if you rate person X something you must rate a certain number of other people before you are allowed to rate person X again. Why are you so against this other than "ridiculous" "booooring!" and "nonsense". What do you have to lose in it?
|
|
#13
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
I am in this home office most of the day and sometimes into the wee hours. I try to answer posts with no replies first. I don't have a lot of patients with a lot of members posts. We all have our good days and our bad days... I'm not saying this "Reputation" thing is bad, it's just that many of us spend a lot of time here, and we sincerely want to help
|
|
#14
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
You don't have to rate every post of course. The original intention was to have it display what a particular post was given, the average. So if you saw a particularly good post or a particularly bad post you could rate that. Regardless of how much someone wants to help, if they post bad advice it is still bad advice, this helps give an indication to the person (or anyone else) needing help on a problem which posts are good. It would be similar to digg.com's system of public up or down ratings, and hopefully in time we get that worked out. Ratings wouldn't be displayed until 3 or 5 or 10 or whatever were recorded, so 1 negative rating doesn't kill the credibility of the post.
A lot of things that got discussed before implementing this aren't working/avaiable yet. I hope RBS's adament refusal to accept this is because there was no OFFICIAL explanation of what is happening and he is just lashing out at the current state of this feature. I hoped the comments by Julio and myself would be enough, but apparently they aren't. It hasn't even been 48 hours since it began. WE (TS) want to make this forum as good as possible, does anyone actually think we just tossed this out there without thinking and discussion on it? IF we can't get everything we want out of it I imagine it will get removed, but we think this can be a benefit not a detriment. Last edited by SNGX1275; 02-13-2007 at 09:10 PM.
|
|
#15
02-13-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
As has been said. It`s new and it`s going to take a while to settle down, while the teething problems are ironed out.
It may indeed turn out to be a bad idea, who knows? However, if that does happen, I`m certain it can be changed or got rid of. I think it`s worth giving it a chance first, rather than disapproving of it after only a day. Regards Howard
|
|
#16
02-13-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah. It's cool. As long as I'm not in the red...
|
|
#17
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
This is a nice feature to have
|
|
#18
02-13-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
What is the significance of the darker and lighter shades of green? And obviously, I'm not talking about myself.
|
|
#19
02-14-2007
|
|||
|
|||
|
That`s a very good question mailpup, unfortunately I don`t know the answer.
I`d be interested to know though. Regards Howard
|
|
#20
02-14-2007
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree that the ratings system should be given it's fair chance. If TS doesn't try it how will we know that it won't work? As I am trying live by more and more these days "I would rather try and fail than not try at all."
I would say that as long as proper consideration has been given (and it seems it has) lets give it a whirl and see what happens.
|
