[09-Jun-2008] Ratings & Medals

[zimmah]

I am not sure how this solves the problems which prompted the site to take the comments out?
If we take the mods out completely and gave total free-reign, we would end with tit for tat verbal vendettas in some cases!
Well i honestly think that would be great and it would truly add some spice to proceedings! hehehe a Flamers paradise! I will fight for it with you if you are up for it!!


.....but can you see why they would not want that?

first of all, you can't leave tit for tat ratings (unless you join a second game with the same person) because you'll still have to wait till the game is archived.
secondly, there is nothing wrong with having some crappy comments on your profile, since simply they would hurt you in any way. some people will leave crappy ratings, with or without comments, and what do we do in most cases? ignore them! so does a comment with it matter? not really! the comments however that contain usefull information based on facts (and you can look them up in the games if you aren't sure whether they are factual or not) that's the information you could use to determine whether a person is worth playing or not, since the comments are much easier to understand then just a few stars on a profile.

and yeah, some people might use it as a flamer paradise, however they might be put on ignore by at least 70% of the CC community, if not more. so i don't think it will be that bad in the end. flamers get ignored by the mayority and they will stop flaming, because they can't join any games because half of the players has them on their ignore list, and no moderater can ever change it. now that's sweet, enjoy flaming paradise

i see no reason why not to!

in fact, without comments there will be more of a problem with persons abusing the system, since it's harder to see if someone gave out a 5 because they deserved it, or just because they think 'they weren't that bad so why not give them the full 5 (even though it's actually officially abusing the system, a lot of people still do this, either on purpose (to f*ck up the system and hope for a new one, or just for the fun 'because i can') or because they are just plain ignorant and don't think they'll harm the ratings in any way by doing so (while they in fact do) or people leaving 1's to everyone because they are out of their mind or some other reason.

if you however add comments, it becomes very clear who's the one leaving idiotic ratings, because idiotic ratings come wih idiotic comments most of the time. and like i said, just put those kind of guys on ignore.

[jiminski]

I am not sure how this solves the problems which prompted the site to take the comments out?
If we take the mods out completely and gave total free-reign, we would end with tit for tat verbal vendettas in some cases!
Well i honestly think that would be great and it would truly add some spice to proceedings! hehehe a Flamers paradise! I will fight for it with you if you are up for it!!


.....but can you see why they would not want that?

first of all, you can't leave tit for tat ratings (unless you join a second game with the same person) because you'll still have to wait till the game is archived.
secondly, there is nothing wrong with having some crappy comments on your profile, since simply they would hurt you in any way. some people will leave crappy ratings, with or without comments, and what do we do in most cases? ignore them! so does a comment with it matter? not really! the comments however that contain usefull information based on facts (and you can look them up in the games if you aren't sure whether they are factual or not) that's the information you could use to determine whether a person is worth playing or not, since the comments are much easier to understand then just a few stars on a profile.

and yeah, some people might use it as a flamer paradise, however they might be put on ignore by at least 70% of the CC community, if not more. so i don't think it will be that bad in the end. flamers get ignored by the mayority and they will stop flaming, because they can't join any games because half of the players has them on their ignore list, and no moderater can ever change it. now that's sweet, enjoy flaming paradise

i see no reason why not to!

in fact, without comments there will be more of a problem with persons abusing the system, since it's harder to see if someone gave out a 5 because they deserved it, or just because they think 'they weren't that bad so why not give them the full 5 (even though it's actually officially abusing the system, a lot of people still do this, either on purpose (to f*ck up the system and hope for a new one, or just for the fun 'because i can') or because they are just plain ignorant and don't think they'll harm the ratings in any way by doing so (while they in fact do) or people leaving 1's to everyone because they are out of their mind or some other reason.

if you however add comments, it becomes very clear who's the one leaving idiotic ratings, because idiotic ratings come wih idiotic comments most of the time. and like i said, just put those kind of guys on ignore.

nope, not good enough... ... i know where you are coming from, of course i do ... but you need something fundamentally new and systematically creative to turn heads.

[zimmah]

I am not sure how this solves the problems which prompted the site to take the comments out?
If we take the mods out completely and gave total free-reign, we would end with tit for tat verbal vendettas in some cases!
Well i honestly think that would be great and it would truly add some spice to proceedings! hehehe a Flamers paradise! I will fight for it with you if you are up for it!!


.....but can you see why they would not want that?

first of all, you can't leave tit for tat ratings (unless you join a second game with the same person) because you'll still have to wait till the game is archived.
secondly, there is nothing wrong with having some crappy comments on your profile, since simply they would hurt you in any way. some people will leave crappy ratings, with or without comments, and what do we do in most cases? ignore them! so does a comment with it matter? not really! the comments however that contain usefull information based on facts (and you can look them up in the games if you aren't sure whether they are factual or not) that's the information you could use to determine whether a person is worth playing or not, since the comments are much easier to understand then just a few stars on a profile.

and yeah, some people might use it as a flamer paradise, however they might be put on ignore by at least 70% of the CC community, if not more. so i don't think it will be that bad in the end. flamers get ignored by the mayority and they will stop flaming, because they can't join any games because half of the players has them on their ignore list, and no moderater can ever change it. now that's sweet, enjoy flaming paradise

i see no reason why not to!

in fact, without comments there will be more of a problem with persons abusing the system, since it's harder to see if someone gave out a 5 because they deserved it, or just because they think 'they weren't that bad so why not give them the full 5 (even though it's actually officially abusing the system, a lot of people still do this, either on purpose (to f*ck up the system and hope for a new one, or just for the fun 'because i can') or because they are just plain ignorant and don't think they'll harm the ratings in any way by doing so (while they in fact do) or people leaving 1's to everyone because they are out of their mind or some other reason.

if you however add comments, it becomes very clear who's the one leaving idiotic ratings, because idiotic ratings come wih idiotic comments most of the time. and like i said, just put those kind of guys on ignore.

nope, not good enough... ... i know where you are coming from, of course i do ... but you need something fundamentally new and systematically creative to turn heads.

written word is still the best to express your opinion about something, no other rating system could ever replace the written word, no matter how creative or good it might be, there is no replacement for written word. especially not a system that might or might not average out unfair or rude player ratings

[DukeToshiro]

How about if you add a special forum moderator group to deal with feedback disputes on a volunteer basis? That way you wouldn't have to hire anyone to do it, it would all be volunteer. Perhaps make a special user group and a special medal for those users who volunteer to help out.


If nothing is done, however, I would much rather prefer no feedback system at all instead of this stupid ratings crap.

[jiminski]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

[jiminski]

How about if you add a special forum moderator group to deal with feedback disputes on a volunteer basis? That way you wouldn't have to hire anyone to do it, it would all be volunteer. Perhaps make a special user group and a special medal for those users who volunteer to help out.


If nothing is done, however, I would much rather prefer no feedback system at all instead of this stupid ratings crap.

that sort of thing is what we need to be talking about!
.
maybe you could do it like the Urban Dictionary... where all users can be part of a control group; Adjudicating over what is acceptable and what is not! with a careful brief and definition of what is acceptable!

Then if say 90% vote it is ok the comment is deemed acceptable, based on the parameters set.

-Self regulating
-Well controlled
and
-Adhering to the viewpoint of the majority!

[DukeToshiro]

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate,...

lol, that's one of the funniest things I've read all day. Isn't "mods" short for moderator?

[jiminski]

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate,...

lol, that's one of the funniest things I've read all day. Isn't "mods" short for moderator?

hehe it may be partner .. but the problem we have is, the feedback moderation takes too many resources .. if we can find an adequate way to mod without the mods ... then maybe we could talk lack into letting us have bespoke but controlled feedback as part of the new system.

[cre8tiff]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

How the hell is the idea, "We use descriptive feedback to assess whether or not to join a game someone is in, or to decide what strategies to use in said game." philosophical? Numbers will not provide this qualitative data on which to base action. You put up a straw man argument to defend a poor decision that was made in a vacuum.

[jiminski]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

How the hell is the idea, "We use descriptive feedback to assess whether or not to join a game someone is in, or to decide what strategies to use in said game." philosophical? Numbers will not provide this qualitative data on which to base action. You put up a straw man argument to defend a poor decision that was made in a vacuum.

shhh

[cre8tiff]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

How the hell is the idea, "We use descriptive feedback to assess whether or not to join a game someone is in, or to decide what strategies to use in said game." philosophical? Numbers will not provide this qualitative data on which to base action. You put up a straw man argument to defend a poor decision that was made in a vacuum.

shhh

That response burned up the exact same number of brain cells as dreaming up the new ratings system. True Fact.

[VermiciousDad]

I haven't read this entire thread, so please do not flame me for ignorance. Suggestion: drop the best rating and worst ratings. For the most part the best rating will be 5. However, dropping the worst rating keeps someone from being screwed over by an individual with malicious intent.

[DukeToshiro]

I think that whoever thought up this dumb idea should be demoted to regulating feedback full-time. That should help with the work load a little bit.

[jiminski]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

How the hell is the idea, "We use descriptive feedback to assess whether or not to join a game someone is in, or to decide what strategies to use in said game." philosophical? Numbers will not provide this qualitative data on which to base action. You put up a straw man argument to defend a poor decision that was made in a vacuum.

shhh

That response burned up the exact same number of brain cells as dreaming up the new ratings system. True Fact.

that is correct, which was the point! if you read my other comments, it puts my stance into context... i am, instead of blustering with no aim other than to blow off steam, trying to get to a realistic alternative which solves the sites problem but gives us our comments back!

... you carry on blustering and fighting all comers if you like but work out your enemy first please.

[Mr_Adams]

why doesn't lackattack have any metals?

[cre8tiff]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

How the hell is the idea, "We use descriptive feedback to assess whether or not to join a game someone is in, or to decide what strategies to use in said game." philosophical? Numbers will not provide this qualitative data on which to base action. You put up a straw man argument to defend a poor decision that was made in a vacuum.

shhh

That response burned up the exact same number of brain cells as dreaming up the new ratings system. True Fact.

that is correct, which was the point! if you read my other comments, it puts my stance into context... i am, instead blustering with no aim other than to blow off steam, trying to get to a realistic alternative which solves the sites problem but gives us our comments back!

... you carry on blustering and fighting all comers if you like but work out your enemy first please.

First of all, I suggest we roll back the old version without arbitrators. See if your ideas of gloom and doom if the almighty mods aren't involved actually come to fruition. It's just a theory the place will fall to pieces, there is no hard evidence it will really happen.

If it does happen, then recode the star charts in include a prompt that requires a reason be typed in for any rating less than the mean (3). This should be well within the abilities of your coders. Then provide the ability to comment to the receiver of the "bad grade". Put back into place the links to the game. And no arbitration. If you think someone has given you stupid feedback, defend yourself. Good players will read the responses.

You people think you have somehow solved the negative feedback issue by not letting folks do comments. You simply allowed the bad guys the cover of darkness.

[Optimus Prime]

why doesn't lackattack have any metals?

He hasn't won any games since the update took place.

[jiminski]

why doesn't lackattack have any metals?

He hasn't won any games since the update took place.

hehe

[jiminski]

First of all, I suggest we roll back the old version without arbitrators. See if your ideas of gloom and doom if the almighty mods aren't involved actually come to fruition. It's just a theory the place will fall to pieces, there is no hard evidence it will really happen.

If it does happen, then recode the star charts in include a prompt that requires a reason be typed in for any rating less than the mean (3). This should be well within the abilities of your coders. Then provide the ability to comment to the receiver of the "bad grade". Put back into place the links to the game. And no arbitration. If you think someone has given you stupid feedback, defend yourself. Good players will read the responses.

You people think you have somehow solved the negative feedback issue by not letting folks do comments. You simply allowed the bad guys the cover of darkness.

keep running around like a headless chicken if you like .. but you are not comprehending the situation.
I am not the bringer of doom and gloom, i am telling you the reasoning that the site has for the change.. in my opinion and from what it has said already!
If you just say 'go back to the original', it is pointless as it won't happen! And if you say 'Comment with no arbitration!' you will not get anywhere either!

Use you passion to think of something creative ... or you just desire without the burden of responsibility: Phase 1 ... you need to move on from that phase!

i think the 'vocational modding' by forum or using all CC members by PM or whatever, (like definitions on Urban Dictionary' may just work!
but if you keep clouding the issue by putting your head in the sand we will get nowhere... again pick your enemy! it is not, although you may want it to be, me!

[Mr_Adams]

why doesn't lackattack have any metals?

He hasn't won any games since the update took place.

oh. oh well. once he does, he'll have all 11 possible metals won't he? 8 metals and 3 placs...

[cre8tiff]

First of all, I suggest we roll back the old version without arbitrators. See if your ideas of gloom and doom if the almighty mods aren't involved actually come to fruition. It's just a theory the place will fall to pieces, there is no hard evidence it will really happen.

If it does happen, then recode the star charts in include a prompt that requires a reason be typed in for any rating less than the mean (3). This should be well within the abilities of your coders. Then provide the ability to comment to the receiver of the "bad grade". Put back into place the links to the game. And no arbitration. If you think someone has given you stupid feedback, defend yourself. Good players will read the responses.

You people think you have somehow solved the negative feedback issue by not letting folks do comments. You simply allowed the bad guys the cover of darkness.

keep running around like a headless chicken if you like .. but you are not comprehending the situation.
I am not the bringer of doom and gloom, i am telling you the reasoning that the site has for the change.. in my opinion and from what it has said already!
If you just say 'go back to the original', it is pointless as it won't happen! And if you say 'Comment with no arbitration!' you will not get anywhere either!

Use you passion to think of something creative ... or you just desire without the burden of responsibility: Phase 1 ... you need to move on from that phase!

i think the 'vocational modding' by forum or using all CC members by PM or whatever, (like definitions on Urban Dictionary' may just work!
but if you keep clouding the issue by putting your head in the sand we will get nowhere... again pick your enemy! it is not, although you may want it to be, me!

If you are not one of the main dudes, then I apologize. You seem to be defending the decision. This is aimed at those keeping this thing in play.

I totally comprehend the situation. The Admins coded a piece of cr@p ratings system and are unwilling to accept responsibility for it. I understand completely.

What they are failing to understand is the thing theyt put in place is WORSE that what they had. It is common IT practice that if something has been rolled out with huge problems, as this clearly has, you roll it back, perform a post mortem and work from there.

The Admins are acting like amateurs.

[Mr_Adams]

he isn't admin
admin have bold red names in the forums.

[jiminski]

If you are not one of the main dudes, then I apologize. You seem to be defending the decision. This is aimed at those keeping this thing in play.

I totally comprehend the situation. The Admins coded a piece of cr@p ratings system and are unwilling to accept responsibility for it. I understand completely.

What they are failing to understand is the thing theyt put in place is WORSE that what they had. It is common IT practice that if something has been rolled out with huge problems, as this clearly has, you roll it back, perform a post mortem and work from there.

The Admins are acting like amateurs.

No worries mate, I am not defending it at all. (put my name in the advanced search and check the general discussion or Announcements forum .. you will see i have been twittering on about this for the last couple of days) just trying to express where i think we are and how we get to somewhere better.

[homes32]

jiminski is right. we can bitch all day and it is not going to make things better. the best way to get this resolved is to come up with a better way to do it and stop saying the same thing everybody else has been saying for the last 35 pages or so. I'm starting to be able to recite every new post as I'm reading it. The old system was flawed. its gone and no amount of whining is going to make it come back. the new system is far from perfect and this is our chance to make it better.

most of us agree that we need some kind of comment to justify the ratings. I agree. but we need to come up with a way to implement them without falling into the same hole as the feedback did.

here is another bone to chew on.
lets we have comments. next to them we have a link [Flag Comment] or something along those lines that would let users mod the comment as retaliatory/false/obscene/whatever. if XX number of people flagged it the system would automatically remove it. obviously each person could only mod once.

lets get some intelligent discussion going here!

[zimmah]

No you misunderstand me Zimm, sorry, i was not clear enough.

the points you make above have already been made and discarded and they are more philosophical than functional in nature.
There is no way that we will change it with debate on the value of the written word alone.

You must come up with a creative structure which will ensure that the mods do not have to moderate, whilst encompassing all the requirements and pitfalls which there are with a bespoke comment system.

Otherwise the impossibility of the systems maintenance (with the in the current, inclusive CC website culture) supercedes all other considerations.

How the hell is the idea, "We use descriptive feedback to assess whether or not to join a game someone is in, or to decide what strategies to use in said game." philosophical? Numbers will not provide this qualitative data on which to base action. You put up a straw man argument to defend a poor decision that was made in a vacuum.

shhh

That response burned up the exact same number of brain cells as dreaming up the new ratings system. True Fact.

do you burn your brain every time you think?