Staredit Network

I think DTBK should be banned for making a rating system where he is the highest rated of all members.

So I can't keep my gold name in v5? It's useful because when posting you can tell if you are getting an answer from somebody who has been here for a long time or not. Plus it's hard to get 1500 posts, especially for me since over 1000 of my posts are in the Map Making Assistance.

actually, thats not true for IEers when you buy name glows.

I second this. It was a huge biatch getting 1500 posts, and I wanna keep my gold name in v5!

*DevliN starts whining*

Plzplzplzplzplzplzplzplzplz IP?!?!??!111one

The way I see it now is... what exactly CAN membergroups do in v5? Assume that looking a certain way doesn't count.

Global attachment space? Buy it.
Max storage PMs? Buy it.
Carbon Copy PMs? Buy it.
Editing and deleting your own posts? IP will probably make those buyable too.

There aren't going to be any advantages of one group over another because IP is making privileges buyable with minerals. I realized about halfway through devising my new system that.... we need reasons for creating such a system before creating a system. My idea would be... something like discounts in the store, or certain items can only be purchashed by certain groups. But, yeah. We need a reason to create such a system before creating it. It sucks, I think my system that I was making was really good, too.

I really like that idea, actually. Like anyone can buy the ability to edit and delete posts, but you have to be at least a Regular to get more attachment space and CC PMs, and an Elite to get more storage space for PMs - supposing the "Regular" and "Elite" statuses were kept.

Yeah, it seems like this system will encourage spamming.

That's where I come in with an even crazier system. I'll explain later.

since one of the biggest issues seems to be post counts and posts per day. what about if we removed those portions entirely. that would fix the issue of determining post quality and prevent spam. how about if it was replaced with time spent viewing SEN? not the time since registration, but the active time the user is on www.staredit.net. of course, there is still some possible issues, such as leaving the window open. this could be prevented by allowing a maximum of so many 'points' per page. therefore providing no benefit to leaving the browser open overnight. of course, i don't know how feasible this would be programming-wise though, but what do you guys think about it?

How about this:

• Users get money for contributions:
  • Submitting DLDB entries (owned by self).
  • Reviewing other DLDB entries.
  • Adding tutorials.
  • Rating other user's contributions/posts (helps moderators).
  • Hosting successful community events.
• Money earned from contributions increases when rated well by other users.
• Money earnable from contributions is capped by own rep. If rep doesn't naturally expand through those contributions, then it's probably time the user stop pissing off the mods and other users (see below).
• Rating from a user weighted by that user's rep, defined roughly by: e ( (b * c) + (a - d ) )
  • Factors:
    • Average peer rating (a)
    • User contributions (b)
    • Average agreeability of ratings (c )
    • Bad behavior (d)
    • Moderator's opinion (e)
  • Note: The only growing factors to this equation are contributions and bad behavior. The others are each contained by limits.
  • Peer rating (a) and user contributions (b) in turn adjusted by user and individual contribution quality, respectively (offsets quantity, to help eliminate popularity contests, spam, and factor in lots of sucky contributions vs. a a few good ones).
  • Agreeability of ratings (c ) is a failsafe for whether a user consistently rates directly opposite to popular opinion, rates nothing but absolute high or low values, or else gives the same rating to everything. That'll help eliminate abusive or poor quality ratings. Random spam ratings might need another system to help with detection and handling, though.
  • Bad behavior (d) is allowed a chance to be offset by user rating above (up to a limit). After a while though, it will eventually start to drain from contributions.
  • Negative rep does not give ability to make negative ratings, but instead simply nullifies them and marks user as potential abuser.

Fairly self-sustaining.

well i realize that'd be impossible at the moment, but if/when we moved to another server with more RAM.

Raw user ratings is just one big popularity contest. However the important factor is that user rating is adjusted by both the user ratings of those who rate you (so some poor rated joe won't affect you much), and by what you contribute to the community (see the outline). In theory the math should gradually reflect a more accurate user "rating" as contributions percilate into it. Trace it out to see what I mean.

The only trick to that system is coming up with a good way to identify arbitrary ratings, so that people wouldn't just spam random ratings for points. The failsafe I mentioned helps for obvious stuff, and I'm sure it can be expanded further to account for other possible abuses, but for the rest it'd be left up to human judgement to decide if someone knows what they're talking about with a rating or just doing it for contribution score. I'm sure you could even go as far as to implement a way to test whether someone knows why they're rating something or not.


But even with all that, human moderation still has to intervene somewhere along the line. Hopefully that system might make it simpler, though.

Zeratul, so someone will make an addon for the browser so it selects a random link once very seconds.. fail miserably. I like IP's system, but I still want something similar to user groups.

Why not an automatic rating system, without the other users give a 1-10 score to the user. I'm sure theres a way.

Inaccurate, too many variables present in certain members not present in others.

someone would actually do that... anyhow, the value of it could be reduced in relation to the other variables