Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-10-31 at 06:10:06
Well, if everyone started at zero, think of people like DTBK who are losing 4000+ posts, even though he is the only people with 4000+ there are a couple more with high 2000's, just think of that time. Even if it is fair, I wish to keep the memories of SEN, I am againdt the reset of posts.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DevliN on 2006-10-31 at 11:56:16
Unfortunately if IP does go with his plan for v5, post will be reset anyway since they supposedly mean nothing in v5. I'd like to keep my 1600 personally... 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-10-31 at 21:07:55
I'd like to keep my 1000+ too, and it would be nice if IP did something like multiply cumulative posts by 3 on this forum and give them to your account on v5. It's fair and balanced. Mainly, though, I can't wait until v5.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BeeR_KeG on 2006-10-31 at 21:50:03
Posting statistics mean nothing in the eyes of an experienced person. To give you all an example, I used to be #2 in the top posters, I had accumulated around 3400 posts during my active days, only to have them wiped because some hacking took place I believe. I am still the same person, slightly better, than before.
I think that post numbers used to achieve a specific member group status is erroneous and thus should be removed. Getting into a new member group, like regulars and elites, should be based on activityness, mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts. We all know that when we start to notice and recognize people from a few months back, we start to think that this guy has been here a while, and should be promoted.
Although this system requires new code, to the already crumbling SeNv4, it can be done manually, or if the intention is for a new v5 system, then so be it.
I think that post numbers used to achieve a specific member group status is erroneous and thus should be removed. Getting into a new member group, like regulars and elites, should be based on activityness, mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts. We all know that when we start to notice and recognize people from a few months back, we start to think that this guy has been here a while, and should be promoted.
Although this system requires new code, to the already crumbling SeNv4, it can be done manually, or if the intention is for a new v5 system, then so be it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MasterJohnny on 2006-11-01 at 01:21:36
slightly...i dont know what i have untill i lost it...and i cant be lower then the member ranking...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DevliN on 2006-11-01 at 04:30:33
QUOTE(BeeR_KeG @ Oct 31 2006, 07:49 PM)
Posting statistics mean nothing in the eyes of an experienced person. To give you all an example, I used to be #2 in the top posters, I had accumulated around 3400 posts during my active days, only to have them wiped because some hacking took place I believe. I am still the same person, slightly better, than before.
I think that post numbers used to achieve a specific member group status is erroneous and thus should be removed. Getting into a new member group, like regulars and elites, should be based on activityness, mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts. We all know that when we start to notice and recognize people from a few months back, we start to think that this guy has been here a while, and should be promoted.
Although this system requires new code, to the already crumbling SeNv4, it can be done manually, or if the intention is for a new v5 system, then so be it.
[right][snapback]581593[/snapback][/right]
I think that post numbers used to achieve a specific member group status is erroneous and thus should be removed. Getting into a new member group, like regulars and elites, should be based on activityness, mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts. We all know that when we start to notice and recognize people from a few months back, we start to think that this guy has been here a while, and should be promoted.
Although this system requires new code, to the already crumbling SeNv4, it can be done manually, or if the intention is for a new v5 system, then so be it.
[right][snapback]581593[/snapback][/right]
On the other hand, however, there are plenty of respected individuals here who haven't been on SEN for two years but should still classify as "Elite" if based on activity. I'm not necessarily sure join date should have a major effect on user groups, though it may play a small role.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-11-01 at 11:09:32
QUOTE
mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts
Sounds like my system, no?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-11-01 at 12:54:49
I think that DTBK's system worked nicely, it showed the poeple that have actually done good for SEN, I think it should be what we use for v5 to get the most accurate rankings.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by JaFF on 2006-11-01 at 13:02:09
QUOTE(Mp)7-7 @ Nov 1 2006, 08:54 PM)
I think that DTBK's system worked nicely, it showed the poeple that have actually done good for SEN, I think it should be what we use for v5 to get the most accurate rankings.
[right][snapback]581767[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]581767[/snapback][/right]
For the love of God, what did Deathawk do to SEN?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-11-01 at 13:44:01
What do you mean "do to SEN"?
I post, what more am I supposed to do as a regular?
The system scores shown now aren't really accurate, I think 1 or 2 of the variables were set to something that they won't always be. Those would affect my rating, as I have a warn level... althought most of them are stupid, minor warns. :\ So don't take these the wrong way, because if I didn't deserve to be up there, or all I did was just spam, I would have a bad member rating, probably making it so I can't get up there.
I post, what more am I supposed to do as a regular?
The system scores shown now aren't really accurate, I think 1 or 2 of the variables were set to something that they won't always be. Those would affect my rating, as I have a warn level... althought most of them are stupid, minor warns. :\ So don't take these the wrong way, because if I didn't deserve to be up there, or all I did was just spam, I would have a bad member rating, probably making it so I can't get up there.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by fritfrat(U) on 2006-11-01 at 16:16:41
I'm amazed to see that people care about post count as much as they do. Honestly, I didn't even notice I was a regular until one day I looked at the bottom of the page and my name was green.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-11-01 at 17:27:59
QUOTE(BeeR_KeG @ Oct 31 2006, 10:50 PM)
Posting statistics mean nothing in the eyes of an experienced person. To give you all an example, I used to be #2 in the top posters, I had accumulated around 3400 posts during my active days, only to have them wiped because some hacking took place I believe. I am still the same person, slightly better, than before.
I think that post numbers used to achieve a specific member group status is erroneous and thus should be removed. Getting into a new member group, like regulars and elites, should be based on activityness, mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts. We all know that when we start to notice and recognize people from a few months back, we start to think that this guy has been here a while, and should be promoted.
Although this system requires new code, to the already crumbling SeNv4, it can be done manually, or if the intention is for a new v5 system, then so be it.
[right][snapback]581593[/snapback][/right]
I think that post numbers used to achieve a specific member group status is erroneous and thus should be removed. Getting into a new member group, like regulars and elites, should be based on activityness, mainly based around some sort of criteria on date of which the party has joined the wesite, and to a lesser extent, posts. We all know that when we start to notice and recognize people from a few months back, we start to think that this guy has been here a while, and should be promoted.
Although this system requires new code, to the already crumbling SeNv4, it can be done manually, or if the intention is for a new v5 system, then so be it.
[right][snapback]581593[/snapback][/right]
Sounds very much what DTBK was trying to implement. The topic is still up, reasons for turning it down still there. Including that it's wrong that someone who joined on first day and posted 5 times could have a higher reputation then someone who joined yesterday and posted 20 times. Activeness, Posts per Day, shouldn't be implemented if total cumulative posts isn't. Posts per Day is based on your total cumulative posts and amount of days you've been on SEN, which I already said I think shouldn't be used at all in any calculations of this.
And when v5 comes out, hacking won't happen nearly as often, so you don't have to worry about that. Or IP could make a small piece of code that automatically makes a backup of all the data about members every few days or weeks.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2006-11-01 at 18:08:11
Only reason now that I care about my post count is that it is likely that DTBK's reputation system will be used. If not, then I could care less about em, even if I had like -3089254 posts.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kookster on 2006-11-01 at 19:35:51
Alot of good members dont have alot of posts, if anything reputation should be based on the qualitly of posts. To do that would be very hard if not impossible since every post would have to be read. Take it from the old timers me and IP status should be left out.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-11-01 at 20:36:50
QUOTE(kookster @ Nov 1 2006, 05:35 PM)
Alot of good members dont have alot of posts, if anything reputation should be based on the qualitly of posts. To do that would be very hard if not impossible since every post would have to be read. Take it from the old timers me and IP status should be left out.
[right][snapback]581936[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]581936[/snapback][/right]
By all means tell, how does a script tell how good your posts are?
The fact that my system is based of cumulative posts already includes the cumulative post system, which works really well. Posts have to be of a certainly length, mostly smashing the ability to post borderline spam.
QUOTE
The topic is still up, reasons for turning it down still there. Including that it's wrong that someone who joined on first day and posted 5 times could have a higher reputation then someone who joined yesterday and posted 20 times. Activeness, Posts per Day, shouldn't be implemented if total cumulative posts isn't. Posts per Day is based on your total cumulative posts and amount of days you've been on SEN, which I already said I think shouldn't be used at all in any calculations of this.
First, it is based on total posts. Noticed the b/10? For example, my 4250 posts add 425 to my base rep score.
Second, it makes perfect sense that someone who joined yesterday and posted 20 times has less rep than someone who joined long ago and then went away. Keep in mind that it wouldn't take long for the new member keeping his activity to pass the old member.
An old member who posted five times long ago and never again would have the rating:
(1.0 [(1.4(1200*) + 5/10 + (8-5)/2 * (3(2)/4)] [(-1/20) (0.0042-6)[sup]2[/sup] + 2])
*approx
1.0[(1680 + 0.5 + 2.25)(0.2025)]
341
This isn't a very high score, and reflects the veneration of an old member, coupled with his inactivity. The average time for a member to move up the scale is maybe a quarter of a year, and after that a member would have passed 341.
(1.0 [(1.4(90) + 378/10 + (7-5)/2 * (3(50)/4)] [(-1/20) (4.2-6)[sup]2[/sup] + 2])
1.0[(126 + 37.8 + 37.5)(1.838)]
370
Simple.
This is especially nice, because if an old-timer like Rexy were to return, they would already have their reputation as such accounted for.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DevliN on 2006-11-02 at 01:16:18
I guess the perfect example as to why I like DTBK's reputation system so much (when talking about post quality) is because it assumes an old member's posts are more valuable than a new member's posts. In other words, a member who joined 7 months ago with 1000 posts has less of a reputation than a member who joined 21 months ago with the same post count. With the current group setting, you can reach "Elite" in 9 months.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-11-02 at 06:37:07
I agree! This is the best system I have seen, the only but I can tell by the one we use now is only based on post length and posts. I think we should use DTBK's, everyone else wants too as well.