LQ Reputation System

MTK358 · 08-30-2010, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

The point of LQ is to help members with Linux and Open Source issues. In what way is this system "not letting us be rewarded for it", even if "it" is helping members new to the site and not simply members?

--jeremy

Imagine a new member, he has only one or two posts because this is his first thread, and no reputation because he didn't help anyone with their questions yet. I relpy to his question with an answer, and he adds to my rep. But I get NOTHING, just because he's new here, right?

jeremy · 08-30-2010, 02:03 PM

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ml#post4082386 contains the announcement that you do not need rep to give rep out (although you do need a minimum amount of posts, as you did to use the "Thanks" system). In addition, even for members who do not have the minimum number of posts, you DO get a notification that they used the reputation system positively, possibly along with a comment... which is more than you got before the system existed.

--jeremy

MTK358 · 08-30-2010, 02:12 PM

But it doesn't get counted!

Besides, what's the purpose of this?

slakmagik · 08-30-2010, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anishakaul

Quote:

Originally Posted by slakmagik

But if I had, I would have voted the same as you. The first is a guy complaining and not entirely getting it, but he seemed to be reasonable about it.

How do you feel he was reasonable ? He was clearly saying (multiple times) that he doesn't want to read the Keywords on Google ! That shows he doesn't even want to try to help himself !
Now, that's highly pathetic !

I meant "reasonable" in the sense that, as far as I saw, he didn't go ballistic and start flaming and cussing people. He wasn't biting the hands that were trying to feed him - just resisting/ignoring them. Counterproductive but not worth down-modding - just ignore him in turn, IMO.

BTW, I have a sort of Usenet sensibility about quotes. You made the last phrase of my statement bold, which wasn't in the original. Maybe say something like "You said, [QUOTE]QUOTED-ITEM[/QUOTE]. (Emphasis mine.)" or something when you do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anishakaul

Actually IMHO that second guy (with the first post on the forum) was far better than most of the newbies I have dealt with here in every respect. And giving a COOKIE for a good question is a way of my telling him, that you can do even better !
I really cannot expect a newbie to ask a **brilliant** question on the very first go !

True. But I also don't feel the need to rep every post. I was just saying I'd save positive or negative reps for extraordinary posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by anishakaul

and thanks for the feedback to you too !

Welcome!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berhanie

Maybe this has already been discussed, but I didn't find it on the search, and 30 pages is too much to go through. I think reputation expressed as a percentage would be more useful. Something like a seller's reputation on ebay.

I also called for a percentage back in this post but without your constructive specifics. And, indeed, the specifics might be changed, but this concretizes the idea I was trying to get across.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berhanie

vaguely speaking, someone with a 100% reputation is 'totally trustworthy', analogous to a seller on ebay who has had no complaints from buyers. we can adjust that a bit by taking into account a user's seniority, number of posts, etc, but
possibly mainly reflecting

Code:

(num_helpful_posts/(num_helpful_posts + num_unhelpful_posts))*100

. you also can also continue to use a point-system underneath a scaling function f() having the property that

Code:

lim f(x) == 1
x --> infinity

just vague thoughts out for discussion.

Different topic: nice to see the Rep is now clickable.

jeremy · 08-30-2010, 02:28 PM

Berhanie, it seems like your idea may be worth starting a dedicated thread for further feedback, if you're so inclined.

--jeremy

slakmagik · 08-30-2010, 02:32 PM

I've noticed a problem. I gave Berhanie my first positive rep on the post I last quoted. And I see he got up-repped a few points for that. But no one can directly see that. And what they directly see are the 'Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No' bit. To me, up-repping someone should automatically show '1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.' But if I give him that directly, as I understand, it would up-rep him less than up-repping directly.

IOW, there's some overlap/contradictions in the helpful/rep systems.

jeremy · 08-30-2010, 02:35 PM

There is some "overlap" by design in that marking a post as helpful will rep someone 50% of what manually doing so would have done. The "But no one can directly see that" is false, as you correctly noted "And I see he got up-repped".

--jeremy

Berhanie · 08-30-2010, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

Berhanie, it seems like your idea may be worth starting a dedicated thread for further feedback, if you're so inclined.

--jeremy

ok. started it here

schneidz · 08-30-2010, 03:22 PM

^ are these rules posted somewhere ?

so basically giving someone a +1 is 1 point. and giving someone rep is 2 points.
but that is weighted by how much xp you have ?

also, do the lite green/ dark green boxes mean anything ?

slakmagik · 08-30-2010, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

There is some "overlap" by design in that marking a post as helpful will rep someone 50% of what manually doing so would have done. The "But no one can directly see that" is false, as you correctly noted "And I see he got up-repped".

I said no one could "directly" see that. I mean that specific post does not have any sign that it specifically got up-repped. Had I marked it helpful it would have a direct sign. But that would have only been half as effective for Berhanie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by schneidz

^ are these rules posted somewhere ?

so basically giving someone a +1 is 1 point. and giving someone rep is 2 points.
but that is weighted by how much xp you have ?

also, do the lite green/ dark green boxes mean anything ?

Schneidz - you don't have to read the whole thread but it's early-ish in the thread, IIRC. Perhaps searching specifically would bring you to the relevant posts. Also see the FAQ. Basically, you just give someone rep. Your rep determines how much rep you can give to someone else. It's not a simple +1/+2. It's just that 'helpful' is half as effective as whatever rep would be. (IIUC.) And, back on the boxes, explanation of green boxes.

schneidz · 08-30-2010, 05:03 PM

^ is there a way to know your reputation power ?

jeremy · 08-30-2010, 05:05 PM

It's not currently posted anywhere, but it's quite easy to figure out once you're using the system.

--jeremy

XavierP · 08-30-2010, 05:46 PM

Although I support this addition to the site, I have always disliked the idea of a rep system for LQ. And this thread - not trying to do anyone down here - shows why: currently a number of people who I know are knowledgeable and helpful are getting incredibly tied up in "fair points" and really digging into the idea of how the points system works. Let's not forget that LQ has lasted for 10 years without this system and no one really worried that they wouldn't be seen as helpful.

While "rewarding" helpful and knowledgeable people is a great thing, I think it is far more worthwhile ensuring the system is easy to use and points are visible than worrying whether a point given is te right number. Personally, as long as the number of points is more than zero, I'm happy.

Seriously, I think a lot of people need to take a wider view: your advice will either be helpful or not helpful with or without a points system. Don't get bogged down in numbers.

schneidz · 08-30-2010, 10:01 PM

^ yes. but how would you know you are winning ?

MrCode · 08-30-2010, 11:36 PM

Quote:

how would you know you are winning ?

I think that's the point XavierP is trying to make...you shouldn't worry about "winning" in the first place. It's not a competition.

...unless that was sarcasm...