LQ should come up with a smarter way of ranking users
 

I have looked at how LQ ranks its users. I was astonished to notice that users are simply ranked by the number of posts they have. While this is a good way of recognising long time members, I find that misleading to especially new users. Of great concern is the title "Guru" that is given when someone reaches 5000 posts. I would have OKed it if only 'Addict' was used.
Most new users (even old users, and indeed everyone) know and believe that 'Gurus' are well knowledgeable, experienced professionals, and their posts are ususally treated as such. On the contrary, these 'gurus' could be merely 'addicts' or 'spammers' who will post any one line useless replies to any new post that comes. Some could even offer misleading, trivial, vague and 'no new information' help and it can unfortunately be a case of churning out posts to reach a certain status.
While I believe that most Linux users are smart people who are very responsible, I understand that in every establishment, there are always those that want to misuse facilities or opportunities.
As a group of 'smart people' i believe linux users should come up with a 'smart' 'weighted' and balanced way or ranking users if they want to include title like 'Gurus' otherwise, it will be best to use titles which are not misleading only, like (newbie, member, senior memember(elder) and addict, and DROP out guru)
Some members that I well respect, as I have realised, have been only replying to posts with subject they are actually very much knowledgeable in, and they have done great job in offering accurate, spot-on and well informing help and answers. Since these are the true GURUs, they tend not to have much time to spam posts (due to their busy consultancy work etc.) so they will probably take 10 years to reach 1000 posts. The current ranking system purely ignores this fact. It doesnt take into account the quality of posts. I know smart pple out there can suggest something better. Thats my opinion.

The difficulty lies in automating the process of determining a quality post. I don't think there is a system which can yet discriminate between a post that was good with respect to the question and one which was utterly useless.

I think the recently implemented Thanks system goes some way to addressing this problem; those users who regularly post useful answers will (may?) receive more Thanks from the people they were responding to.

If you know of a different way, I'm sure Jeremy would be all ears.

Also, I've asked the mods to move this to LQ Suggestions and Feedback.

edit: The title Guru is one chosen by the member in question; the choice after 5000 posts is either Guru or LQ Addict. See http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...faq#faq_newbie.

It (hopefully) may not surprise you to learn you're not the first to express such opinions. Try the search button.
I have cajoled jeremy consistently about this - my advice, ignore all the rankings. Judge posts (and posters) by the intrinsic quality (or otherwise) of posts.

An ongoing discussion. Search for "newbie addict guru" in LQ_suggestions_&_Feedback forum. You will get 17 threads on this topic. Personally I agree with syg00: ignore the ranks!

Moved: This thread is more suitable in <Suggestions and Feedback> and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

I guess the problem with the choice of 'guru' or 'addict' is that even if someone doesn't want the title 'guru' for ego reasons, 'addict' has negative connotations, so people will choose guru to avoid that. I doubt that many people really give much consideration to the rank of the poster though when reading a post.

I don't let post counts affect my judgment of how smart I think someone is on a message board. Any advice given here should be researched and tested before being used by the person needing help. Once you've been around a message board long enough you know the people who's advice is of a "guru" quality, versus someone who is speaking out of their ass.

some members go as far as posting rhetoric questions just to buff up their posts, even in this particular forum, just check some of the threads you will notice.

My suggestion is: (posts/(thanks+1))/months_as_member
If your score is above 8, --> Learner
If your score is less than 8, --> User
If your score is less than 2, --> Advanced User
If your score is less than 1, --> Expert
If your score is less than 0.8, --> Guru

Then all users whose accounts are 3 months old or less --> LQ Newbies

Rounding to three decimal places only!

examples:
6000 posts
99 thanks
3 years as member
(6000/100)/36 = 1.667 --> Advanced User (season user, has been around for long, managed to learn and offer some useful help)

6000 posts
9 thanks
3 years as member
(6000/10)/36 = 16.67 --> Learner (takes ages to learn)

1000 posts
9 thanks
2 years as member
(1000/10)/24 = 4.167 --> User (has been around, but largely seeking help)

200 posts
29 thanks
8 months as member
(200/30)/8 = 0.833 --> Expert (relatively new, but has offered spot-on advice)

100 posts
9 thanks
1 years as member
(100/10)/12 = 1.2 --> Advanced User (few posts, but is 10% of them really helped others, the he knows what he is doing)

280 posts
29 thanks
6 months as member
(280/30)/7 = 1.333 --> Advanced User (a knowledgeable person, who offered tremendous help, but still very new to LQ for us to classify as guru, hence adv user status)

280 posts
29 thanks
12 months as member
(280/30)/13 = 0.718 --> Guru (a knowledgeable person, having been around for some time now, can now qualify)

Note that the lats 2 examples differ only in the period spent as member. This illustrates The following:
It fends off newbies who just rush to offer (although good) help with the aim to reach guru status in a short time.
Although the last example easily attained Guru after 12 months, you will notice that the assumption was no further posts were made, and no futher thanks were awarded. If however, more posts were submitted with no increase in thanks, you will find it will be difficult to attain Guru status.

The whole point of ranking becomes interesting now!! just my opinion

Hi, I like your idea.

It's interesting how sums can be made up.

But isn't a year 12 months long, ie your examples...

Any way it's a nice idea, but just how many people really post for status reasons only?

Would people who genuinely ask and answer questions to the best of their ability be penalised by your system?

The maths probably doesn't make a lot of difference unless you are a programmer of something.

That would make me an expert, but I don't consider myself one, I'm still learning, and there's a lot to learn.

<edit> maybe contributions could be used as well, being a community-supporting type of roll must hold some significance(?)</edit>

No offence intended, my friend, ;-)

Cheers. Glenn

Sorry, I have corrected my math. surely a member for 8 years would have deserved more, having been around for such a long time eg.

6000 posts
99 thanks
8 years as member
(6000/100)/96 = 0.625 --> Guru

(but also note tthat he is at the uper end of that scale, close to 0.8)

My System doesnt punish those who ask and answer genuinely, because it can recognise someone as an expert with only 12 posts, imagine!!!!

From my calculation, your score is 1.714, which DOESNT qualify to be an expert!!!! but an Advanced User.
Still you have been labelled a 'Senior Member' do you consider yourself 'Senior'? In what respect? If you can agree with that title, then for sure you should be able to accept being labelled 'Advanced User' of some sort, especially with 15 thanks, noone can deny that you at least know what you are doing.

Nobody ever said experts dont learn anyway. Most of them in real life are 'consultants' who 'LEARN' with each and every case that a 'Client' brings.

ABOVE ALL, my system primary gaol is to add FUN to the whole thing

I hope this makes sense.

The other problem with the proposed math is that the "thanks" system hasn't been around all that long. Long time members with thousands of posts didn't have a chance to be "thanked" for their fair percentage before the "thanks" system was in place. You'd have to separate out number of posts since the system was implemented and possibly extropolate into the past for the rest of them... so

and then you might want to reward people for longevity somehow too..

It all sounds too complicated and hardly worth the bother. It's pretty easy to see whose advice is worthwhile after a little experience reading. Mine is mostlyharmless. ;)

Yes, that's true, the thanking system is quite new,

My community-supporter idea should have mentioned tutorials, whitepapers and informative blogs.

But still, if we did not share ideas, where would we be?

Cheers Glenn

This is already weighted in the original math. If you check closely you will realise that long standing members are well rewarded, eg. if you check my latest correction,
A similar member who only has been around for three years will only be an Advanced User.

My understanding of the thanking system is:

If a New user searches for an answer to their problem in the forum, and find the solution in someone else's post, IRREGARDLESS of the age of that post, the newbie can still award thanks to that post!!!

and I have done just that, in the past when I joined and was searching for a solution. I was actually impressed by the solutions that were given to my exactly similar problem.

How about everyone starts at Guru and gets points deducted for posting dumb comments?!?

-1

On these ones, I agree with you, and I believe it can be very easy to integrate their maths into the original maths since they are also 'posts'. What I wouldn't want to come into the equation is the contribution, since this is purely a financial attribute.

oops, my bad. It's late :-) here.


I'm 46yo.

I think this's a worthy discussion.

Thank you, I'm going to bed before I make another mistake, and wipe my hd or something.

Regards Glenn

ps. when I mentioned contributions, I was referring to "documents" like blogs, whitepapers etc., they take ages to write nicely.

Check this thread if you want to see what I mean:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ml#post3556757
And look closes at the users there, their statistics (questions and interests) (no offense) (they even acknowledged that they reached high posts, but dont deserve titles, moderator also gave a post indicating that number of posts correlates to knowledge)
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ht=guru+addict

You can easily see that MOST people are concerned about their titles (or of others). If you dont believe that, I would like the mods to take a poll.

@rob124: I think it's possible to overthink this and perhaps place more importance on so-called "titles" than necessary. IMO, the value of each post stands for itself. I place posts into one of two categories: 1) worthwhile/helpful/thought provoking; and 2) noise.

I don't recall ever looking at someone's "title" (i.e. post count) and thinking better or worse of him. Actually after spending some time on the forums, you begin to associate user names - not titles - with consistently good or crummy advice.

EXAMPLE CASE

In this post: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ml#post3556757
masand who has;
5506 posts
0 thanks
6 years as member

we quote him writing to the moderator saying:
My math would have correctly put him as a 'Leaner' which he truely is. So my system can distinguish btwn askers and solution providers.

Currently a confused Microsoft Windows Admin, starting on Linux acn quickly attain 'Guru' because they will be 'asking' after every shell command :D

Maybe a SysAdmin, but not a NetAdmin. The Sysadmins are also the ones that bring me my coffee, or I block them from the net. They never have figured out that I put that "disable local firewall" policy inside of the DC attached to the netadmin group.

I have searched and was ASTONISHED to realise there are GAZILLIONS of threads and posts about TITLES. One way or the other, PPLE will talk about it, and they will CONTINUE to debate about it. My system was going to give them something more interesting, FUN, thought provoking, smart, intelligent, motivating and NOT SO Common way of looking at it.

@rob124: Frankly, I also find it a bit odd that every one of your posts thus far has been complaining/arguing for a better "title" system. Are you here to get help with your Linux questions or what?

You have sense of humour that I like

@rob124: Please keep the discussion to one thread, reanimating long dead threads won't help and is annoying to be honest.
If you do want to put some attention on them put the related links in this thread.

Here where? This is 'LQ Suggestions & Feedback' and I am 'suggesting' you cant expect me to be asking questions in this forum.
I am particularly interested in this forum, unless if YOU (maybe you are a moderator) want to place a rule to says "those who do not post elsewhere, shld not post in 'LQ suggestions'"
All the same, these suggestions are mearnt to BETTER LQ experience, not destroy it, and i doubt very much YOUR professionalism, if you can not stomach other users suggestions and opinions.
FYI, I am not HERE to get help with my Linux questions, IF i wanted that help I would be in 'Linux-server' or 'Linux-networking' I thot you knew all this.

Also I am much smarter that I dont repeat questions that have been saked and answered somewhere, If came here with loads of questions but found answers without REPEATING the questions just to bump up my posts.

@druuna
Point taken, thanks

@druuna
Point taken, thanks

Likewise I am astonished to notice that since you became a member of LQ you have contributed nothing to solving your own or other peoples problems but have been concentrating solely on "status" and similar issues. Not that you're not allowed to use LQ that way, but it I kind of makes me wonder what's your true agenda?..

@unSpawn
Simple!
My agenga is to be a pioneer of a LQ ranking system, when you guys finally embrace my idea, I will take pride in it.

Like I said before, It doesnt mean I dont have questions, BUT whats the point in repeating questions when I have found them answered somewhere else within the forum??? I think you do bad by suggesting that members should just post and post and post questions or answers without checking first whether the issue is dealt with somewhere. I spend time here just searching for answers, RATHER than reposting similar and stupid questions. Personally I find that as a smarter way of doing things here. I will only post a question if its something new, NOT answered anywhere else here.

Very soon I wont be a Newbie :D

As an engineering manager, I have developed a reflex in which I come into some random debate and ask: What problem are we trying to solve?

This thread fits---I see no problem with the current system---especially with the "Thanks" feature. I suggest that Jeremy add this to his existing list of ideas for change, and then we can all go back to work.

Jeremy has gone on record publicly within this sub-forum to say that the titles are not indicative of anyone's knowledge and are really just there as a little "thanks" for posting a certain number of times. We have had many many discussions around this subject - to turn the titles into actual ranks, to make them more "fun" and to do away with them altogether. I guess that this is the 2009 H1 thread. We are a relatively self-cleaning forum - duff responses are largely stamped on and corrected and in that way members can see who offers useful information and who doesn't.

All members are encouraged to provide worthwhile answers to questions, whether the member has their own question or not. Frankly, titles are so trivial that it seems odd to devote so much time to the question. The only important title is the one held by Jeremy - that of Admin. All the rest are changeable.

What was the problem solved when the current ranking system was put in place???

If you deny that the title 'GURU' is misleading to new members, THEN you probably are not GETTING IT. UNLESS if there was a WELCOME message which deliberately WARNS the new members that these titles are actually USELESS, but then according to my knowledge, newbies will NOT EASILY find threads like these. (of which newbies are the real desperate solutions seekers)

Most of you are brushing away my system before even looking at it, give it a GO. Its a pitty that SOME of these false 'gurus' are AFRAID of being 'STRIPPED' of their self proclaimed GURU status....

Ummm, better look again. Last time I checked, pixellany, XavierP, & unSpawn were MODERATORS. Furthermore, NOBODY is a "self-proclaimed" Guru.

Perhaps that's YOUR only goal for continuing to post in this thread?

Why is any title misleading ?
Someone is seeking for a answer for his problem and he get a advise from
somebody look carefully to that advice and make youŕe own judgement .
So a other option is no titles at all .
Meaning No Newbie NO Senior Members NO Guruś Only Members and that is it

Can someone kill this thread?

Signed by a non-guru guru.

...and a non-member member(??) :D

This thread sucks!!! pure waste of time

...by guru non-guru non-member member

I was never a guru, I opted for something like "compulsive poster" or whatever the second option was. The titles are not designed to show knowledge and never have done, they have always just been there to recognise number of posts. For guru, read "long term member/high poster" and adjust for the other titles. That is all they show.

To reiterate - the titles and post count do not matter, the knowledge imparted is what is important. Really, if titles mean so much, it is indicative of something deeper seated.

Hi, This post grabbed my attention if only for the statisical math, Not for a need of change.

It helps me understand more about how figures can be

manipulated to reflect "a" point of view (answers a question desirably).

Overall, I agree with "XavierP", valid points and ADMIN is KING.

yours sincerely Glenn

True, i was also drawn by the maths this guy attempted, its funny how figures can be manipulated and produce 'some trend'

1st, if you agree that this thread is "Terrible", rate it that way.

2nd, thank you, rob124, for inspiring me to think up a new epithet that I didn't learn in the Army. I won't mention here because it would a personal attack &c.

3rd, did anyone bother to apply the formula to some of our long time users? I hope this real world test speaks for itself.

4th, vBulletin already includes a reputation feature which jeremy has wisely not implemented (along w/ avatars -- esp. moving ones).

Interesting, check the translations!
Can some one pick up some of your familiar/welknown usernames whom you associate with good answers and try this lets see.

As a reminder of the criteria:

Which given that the first 4 in the list are some of the most knowledgeable in the forum shows how poorly you "system" works.

Mind you, 'User --> Member', it does not mean they dont know a thing. It actually acknowledged them as "True Linux Users" however the system is very competitive and only "WELL" deserving users will reach "Advanced User" status, Most will just reamain as "User" which is very true in reality.

Vast number of posts does not mean knowledge
A true genius!.
The others who are ranked as "Users" are also not that bad!

and you:
You are among the top.
Surely you should not just dismiss my system

@billymayday
I challenge you, show an Adv User, an Expert and a Guru who doest deserve it and I will surely Abandon my system;

I remind you of the 'STRICT' Criteria once again:
Formula is (posts/(thanks+1))/months_as_member
If your score is greater or equal to 8, --> Learner
If your score is less than 8, --> User
If your score is less than 2, --> Advanced User
If your score is less than 1, --> Expert
If your score is less than 0.8, --> Guru
Then all users whose accounts are 3 months old or less --> LQ Newbie

I can't be bothered looking, but I'll show you 1 L"Learner", 2 "Users" and 1 "Advanced User" who don't deserve it, and that's at least as bad as a mis-labeled guru.

brianL:
(2084/(48+1))/42 = 1.012633625
:D :D LOL ROTFL LMAO !!????!!!

funny!