Author
|
Topic: Reputation Notes (Read 7407 times) |
|
Ophis
Initiate
Posts: 176
Reputation: 5.64
Rate Ophis
 
|
 |
Reputation Notes
« on: 2003-10-12 01:11:30 » |
 |
I was startled to find out today that someone with a respectable amount of equity rated me down on Meridion as deserving to be banned from Virus (rating of "1"). While I can respect that I sometimes voice ideas that can be perceived as being controversial, I can't think of something that I've said that would warrant getting banned from CoV.
If I had received a score of "2" (Little or no redeeming value), I could have understood that this Virian was in strong disagreement with my postings and judged me to be a hopeless nut-case. But this "1" (This person should be banned) rating seems pretty extreme to me.
So I'd like to recommend a new feature to Meridion: Along with a rating, one should be able to leave an anonymous note to the person being rated.
This note would be optional of course and I think it best if the note was not public but only readable by the person to which it is addressed. Extreme ratings (1 or 9), in particular, would be more meaningful if they were accompanied with such anotations.
As a rater, I obviously have praises for Virians that I've rated as "9" and I obviously have strong feelings against those that I might rate as "1". This new feature would allow a rater to express these opinions more clearly.
As a ratee, I could find encouragements in "high rating" notes and discover things to watch out for in "low rating" notes. I would also not value a rating of "1" without notes as highly as a rating of "1" with notes.
Instead, all I know right now is that there is a Virian out there that is trying to tell me something, but the message is too crude in its numeral form to be truly meaningful to me. As it is, this rating to me is either worthless (what do I care that someone doesn't like me?), misleading (who might I have offended lately?), or quite simply puzzling (what have I said/done?).
|
|
|
|
|
prometheus
Adept
Gender: 
Posts: 37
Reputation: 7.02
Rate prometheus
Where's the fire?
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #1 on: 2003-10-12 22:30:40 » |
|
Ophis;
Sorry to hear about your unfortunate rerating.
Your idea about an optional anonymous comment message is a good one but one would think that you would have been given some indication in one of the forums of an issue if the person in question wished to make you aware of the problem.
This example brings me to another potentially useful addition to Meridion.
It would be nice tobe able to track your ratings over time not to such a degree that you can necessarily figure out who down rated you but perhaps if there is a triggering event then it might be localized. Perhaps a post annoyed someone.
If we were able to track our reputations over time then we might be able to notice patterns of behaviour that affect our ratings and decide if those are something that we are willing to alter. More finely tuned feedback.
Prometheus.
|
|
|
|
|
kirksteele
Acolyte
Posts: 74
Reputation: 4.36
Rate kirksteele
I have never logged in.
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #2 on: 2003-10-12 23:19:57 » |
|
[Prometheus]
If we were able to track our reputations over time then we might be able to notice patterns of behavior that affect our ratings and decide if those are something that we are willing to alter. More finely tuned feedback.
[kirk]
Such a system of "tracking our reputation" is already in place. It is called the "well differentiated human psych." With it is in place the ability to self-monitor. An external system of technical documentation is not "needed" merely convenient as an adjunct to those for whom this level of maturity has not yet developed.
If you piss somebody off, you should already know it without having to be told. If you claim ignorance then you admit immaturity or worse yet, dysfunction. You choose.
Meridon does not need a tracking system. Let your conscious be you guide. Failing that, let natural selection take its course.
Have a nice day
Kirk Steele
|
"Howdy pawdna. Yeee-freakin-haw!! We got us another good ole boy in da White Wash"
-just shoot me
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.10
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #3 on: 2003-10-13 07:03:45 » |
|
[Ophis]
I was startled to find out today that someone with a respectable amount of equity rated me down on Meridion as deserving to be banned from Virus (rating of "1"). While I can respect that I sometimes voice ideas that can be perceived as being controversial, I can't think of something that I've said that would warrant getting banned from CoV.
If I had received a score of "2" (Little or no redeeming value), I could have understood that this Virian was in strong disagreement with my postings and judged me to be a hopeless nut-case. But this "1" (This person should be banned) rating seems pretty extreme to me.
<snip>
[rhinoceros]
I wouldn't worry so much, Ophis. I doubt anyone here would give you an "1" for the views you have expressed. In fact, I am pretty sure this is not what happened. Everyone gets this kind of ratings from time to time for different reasons. There are many ways it can go wrong and it does not necessarily have anything to do with you.
There is at least one virian who distributes his ratings randomly all over the range as a protest for the rating system itself. Others may give you a low rating to diminish the effect of a low rating you gave them, or just to "correct" the order. Also, when a spat happens (not in your case -- you would know) voters may give each other a very low rating, both their reputations will drop, and then sometimes they will both try to defend their standing by figuring out who has rated them low and who has rated the opponent high (so that they can weaken the effect of the opponent's vote on themselves). There can also be an avalanche effect when other virian have a definite opinion about such a spat.
Restraint can help when someone wants to express a negative opinion. Maybe sticking to a rating no more than a couple of points lower than what you used to give, rather than going all the way down to an "1". Hopefully, these effects will be temporary and statistically insignificant. And you can't fully interpret a vote. It includes many different aspects, which the voters also weigh differently. Keep in mind that leaving someone of "high reputation" unrated it is as if you gave a "5", which could get you involved in such a situation when it occurs.
All this may seem "dirty", but everything that involves status has this side to it. You know, we do have to make timely decisions about CoV on a lot of more or less important things and this rating thing is the best we managed to come up with up to the present.
An opinion vote has already been done (still open) where most people think that all ratings should be made public in the future. I can't say what will be better and what will be worse this way (I'll have to ponder more on why ballots are usually secret), but it is possible that it will be implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
Kharin
Archon
Posts: 407
Reputation: 8.46
Rate Kharin
In heaven all the interesting people are missing.
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #4 on: 2003-10-13 09:39:52 » |
|
Ophis,
I would not place any great weight on one aberrant result; the degree of equity you have suggests a well liked and respected member to me.
While I can see some advantages to the anonymous feedback system you outline, I can see the possibility that it would be used as a mechanism for delivering hate mail, which would be a somewhat undesirable outcome for a well intended scheme.
Rhino,
In historical terms secret ballots were created to avoid landowners/employers placing pressure on their tenants/employers to vote in a particular manner. The early nineties UK general election that saw John Major re-elected was especially noteworthy because a great many female voters apparently lied to the pollsters in order to avoid conflict (and pressure) with spouses having opposed voting intentions. The result was an unpredicted Tory election victory. An open ballot might have had a different result.
In this context, the advantages of open ballots are that the transparency avoids people being placed in the uncertain predicament Ophis describes and people are discouraged from using the reputations system for purposes that they would not wish to openly acknowledge. The disadvantages of open ballots are that people may give a polite rating rather than a genuine one and that people may be put under pressure to change their ballot or face abuse for a particular voting decision.
|
|
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.83
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #5 on: 2003-10-13 13:24:08 » |
|
Quote from: prometheus on 2003-10-12 22:30:40
It would be nice tobe able to track your ratings over time not to such a degree that you can necessarily figure out who down rated you but perhaps if there is a triggering event then it might be localized. Perhaps a post annoyed someone.
|
I agree it would be nice to track reputations over time and in the last few days I have started to design the necessary changes to the system to do precisely that. There are some other changes I have to make first. One (which will help with the history feature) is to log changes to the ratings. Then all ratings will be made public, except for ratings that were entered before the logging feature (I don't want to expose any ratings that were entered under privacy assumptions). Then I can look at the history feature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
prometheus
Adept
Gender:
Posts: 37
Reputation: 7.02
Rate prometheus
Where's the fire?
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #7 on: 2003-10-14 15:24:02 » |
|
Quote from: David Lucifer on 2003-10-13 13:24:08
Quote from: prometheus on 2003-10-12 22:30:40
It would be nice tobe able to track your ratings over time not to such a degree that you can necessarily figure out who down rated you but perhaps if there is a triggering event then it might be localized. Perhaps a post annoyed someone.
|
I agree it would be nice to track reputations over time and in the last few days I have started to design the necessary changes to the system to do precisely that. There are some other changes I have to make first. One (which will help with the history feature) is to log changes to the ratings. Then all ratings will be made public, except for ratings that were entered before the logging feature (I don't want to expose any ratings that were entered under privacy assumptions). Then I can look at the history feature.
|
Perhaps we could run "secret ballot" Meridion alongside "public" Meridion in the initial stages so that we could compare the results and then continue with "public" Meridion if that remains the consensus.
Prometheus
|
|
|
|
|
metahuman
Acolyte
Gender:
Posts: 212
Reputation: 4.30
Rate metahuman
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #8 on: 2003-10-27 08:01:33 » |
|
Hermit's notes conclude that people who do not participate in Meridion are valueless and non-contributive simply based on a reputation record. I don't participate in Meridion and I don't judge others by it (unlike Hermit).
Tuesday is the day of the extended Meridion chat. Gather up your forces and prepare for localroger's assault.
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Arnold
Magister
Gender:
Posts: 92
Reputation: 6.12
Rate Matt Arnold
The Electric Monk
    
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #9 on: 2004-05-18 16:13:07 » |
|
Help out a neophyte here, what are the Applaud and Smite buttons there for, if not voting for individual posts? A blanket judgement of an entire person is certainly better than nothing, but isn't it more informative and accurate to express approval or disapproval for specific words and actions, and let the aggregate of that form the rating of the person to whom the words and actions belong? I'm surprised if it doesn't work that way.
|
He believed in a door. The door was the way to... to... The Door was The Way. Good. Capital letters were always the best way of dealing with things you didn't have a good answer to.
|
|
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.83
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #10 on: 2004-05-24 19:59:19 » |
|
Quote from: Matt_Arnold on 2004-05-18 16:13:07
Help out a neophyte here, what are the Applaud and Smite buttons there for, if not voting for individual posts? A blanket judgement of an entire person is certainly better than nothing, but isn't it more informative and accurate to express approval or disapproval for specific words and actions, and let the aggregate of that form the rating of the person to whom the words and actions belong? I'm surprised if it doesn't work that way.
|
The karma rating is exactly what you say, a vote for or against the individual post. What do you mean it doesn't work that way?
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Arnold
Magister
Gender:
Posts: 92
Reputation: 6.12
Rate Matt Arnold
The Electric Monk
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #11 on: 2004-05-25 01:07:04 » |
|
At the time of that posting I didn't yet understand that there were two separate ratings systems in place, karma and reputation. I see now that there exists both the blanket evaluation, called reputation -- and the smiting and applauding of specific posts, called karma. Do the two interact with each other? Is a smiting or applauding weighted according to the reputation of the applauder or smiter? When we vote on others' reputation, is that weighted according to our own karma? Or is karma just a number that appears on our posts so that people can notice our behavior record?
|
He believed in a door. The door was the way to... to... The Door was The Way. Good. Capital letters were always the best way of dealing with things you didn't have a good answer to.
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.10
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #12 on: 2004-05-25 10:59:49 » |
|
The karma rating is independent from reputation and it is simple and linear -- one click, one unit. It only depends (at least directly) on the posts -- their perceived quality and their number.
The reputation rating is a direct overall evaluation according to each ones own criteria -- knowledge, judgement, inquisitiveness, entertainment, care for the community, whatever one values most here. It is not strictly democratic, and it gives people different voting power even for the reputation ratings themselfes. The idea is somehow related to the way we put more stock in what certain people have to say in real life, and it is also intended to provide a handful of people the authority for decisions on daily issues with reasonable effort and within reasonable time.
By the way, I don't believe there is a "default" inner circle. The system does have some time lag, because people are often inclined to vote only whenever a "critical issue" arises. Regarding why you have to vote first to join the system, I am not sure that should be necessary but personally I give one point less to people who get into the system but "don't play" (i.e. they leave everyone at 5).
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Arnold
Magister
Gender:
Posts: 92
Reputation: 6.12
Rate Matt Arnold
The Electric Monk
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #13 on: 2004-05-26 14:11:08 » |
|
Why does my profile say I'm an Adept, while my posts identify me as an Initiate? According to the Wiki, I'm not supposed to be called an Adept until I've reached 7 reputation points. It defines Adept as "someone who is dazzlingly skilled in any field." Is this a glitch?
What is a Cenobyte? There are people whose profile calls them a Cenobyte while their posts refer to them as an Initiate. Is it synonymous with Initiate and Acolyte?
|
He believed in a door. The door was the way to... to... The Door was The Way. Good. Capital letters were always the best way of dealing with things you didn't have a good answer to.
|
|
|
rhinoceros
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 1318
Reputation: 8.10
Rate rhinoceros
My point is ...
|
|
Re:Reputation Notes
« Reply #14 on: 2004-05-26 15:10:30 » |
|
The titles you see on the profile pages, such as "Acolyte", "Adept", "Cenobyte, "Congregation", "Silverback Archvector" etc. are leftovers from a past hierarchy structure. It seems that some of them which depend on the number of posts still work. They have no relation with the ones listed in the Wiki.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
