ratings tags

[Darwins_Bane]

Concise description:
Show the most often received rating tag(s) in the user profile beside their rating.

Specifics:
Basically, along with showing the rating that each person has in their profile, also display the most or the couple most often given tags to go along with their ratings.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• allow you to more easily pick out qualities based on other people's opinions
• encourage better and fairer use of the tags and ratings system

[Jatekos]

Concise description:

Tags seem to describe players more accurately than the stars given to them. With the implementation of this suggestion, I think we could make good use of them similarly to the rating averages displayed for the attributes.


• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most time, on the player's profile.
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes. Indicate % of all tags recieved.

Specifics/Details:

• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most on the player's profile.
  E.g. Rating: 4.7 Good teammate
  
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes.
  E.g.
  Attribute - Average
  Fair Play 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  Gameplay 4.6 (rated by 59 players)
  Attitude 4.7 (rated by 58 players)
  Overall 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  
  Tag - % of all tags received
  Good teammate 25
  Complainer 22
  Good strategy 17

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Provides useful information by highlighting the most common (probably the most relevant) tags.
• Saves time of checking lots of ratings.
• Encourages players to rate others and to use tags. May as well encourage good sportmanship, as the most common tags received will be more noticable.
• Makes it easier to decide whether to join a game with someone or not (for those, who care about it).

[Woodruff]

Concise description:

Tags seem to describe players more accurately than the stars given to them. With the implementation of this suggestion, I think we could make good use of them similarly to the rating averages displayed for the attributes.


• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most time, on the player's profile.
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes. Indicate % of all tags recieved.

Specifics/Details:

• Display the 1 rating tag that the player has received the most on the player's profile.
  E.g. Rating: 4.7 Good teammate
  
• Display the 3 most common rating tags that the player has received on the ratings page, below the average ratings of the attributes.
  E.g.
  Attribute - Average
  Fair Play 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  Gameplay 4.6 (rated by 59 players)
  Attitude 4.7 (rated by 58 players)
  Overall 4.7 (rated by 59 players)
  
  Tag - % of all tags received
  Good teammate 25
  Complainer 22
  Good strategy 17

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Provides useful information by highlighting the most common (probably the most relevant) tags.
• Saves time of checking lots of ratings.
• Encourages players to rate others and to use tags. May as well encourage good sportmanship, as the most common tags received will be more noticable.
• Makes it easier to decide whether to join a game with someone or not (for those, who care about it).

This seems like a good idea to me, and easily coded. Some resolution would need to be determined for "ties for first", if you will.

[PLAYER57832]

Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

[Jatekos]

Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

Have you checked the ratings you received? You have good strategy, quick and friendly tags all over the first page of your ratings. On the first page, almost every 2nd rater gave tags to you.

I think that generally there are more thoughts put in those ratings that have tags attached to them than to the ones without tags. These are usually not the 'let's give everyone 5s' type. Agreed, everyone receives negative comments as well, but usually only a few (unless they are given for a reason).

Also, I think that if implemented, it will encourage players to rate others and to use tags more often.

[Jatekos]

This seems like a good idea to me, and easily coded. Some resolution would need to be determined for "ties for first", if you will.

Thanks Woodruff. You're right, there can be ties as well.
How about displaying the tag that was recieved first (or last) out of those that have been received the same times.

[Arama86n]

awesome idea, you got my vote.

[PLAYER57832]

Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

Have you checked the ratings you received? You have good strategy, quick and friendly tags all over the first page of your ratings. On the first page, almost every 2nd rater gave tags to you.

I think that generally there are more thoughts put in those ratings that have tags attached to them than to the ones without tags. These are usually not the 'let's give everyone 5s' type. Agreed, everyone receives negative comments as well, but usually only a few (unless they are given for a reason).

Also, I think that if implemented, it will encourage players to rate others and to use tags more often.

Yes, I do occasionally look at my tags.

At first, more people (including myself) gave tags, but it was kind of a "fad" that died out. Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

The real problem is that ratings themselves don't tell much -- with or without tags, in part because they are so changeable. I can play 20 games with someone, then if I play another game where something happens.. maybe we are both in a bad mood, maybe I wind up deadbeating ( I usually don't rate people poorly just for deadbeating).. whatever, but I get a bad rating.

Also, I think the tags, as they exist right now, are just not all that informative. This might be a decent idea, but I would first like to see the ratings averaged, the tags improved, then this might make sense.

[Jatekos]

Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

The real problem is that ratings themselves don't tell much -- with or without tags, in part because they are so changeable. I can play 20 games with someone, then if I play another game where something happens.. maybe we are both in a bad mood, maybe I wind up deadbeating ( I usually don't rate people poorly just for deadbeating).. whatever, but I get a bad rating.

I don't think it is too much of a problem. Ratings and tags can be updated to be better or worse as well. If you are in a bad mood or deadbeat then you should not expect perfect rating with nice tags. However, if you play with the rater next time and behave differently then I think you could mutually agree to withdraw the prevous ratings at least. As most people improve over time, ratings (and tags) should usually be improved, in my opinion.

Also, I think the tags, as they exist right now, are just not all that informative. This might be a decent idea, but I would first like to see the ratings averaged, the tags improved, then this might make sense.

If by having the 'ratings averaged', you mean that ratings are generally too good then I totally agree with you. Unfortunately this will probably not change in the foreseeable future, so I would not delay any other improvements because of this.
There is another thread about the review of explanatory tags, but I don't think that we should wait for the outcome of that idea either. If there will be new tags, fine. This idea could work with any tags.

[Woodruff]

Few people even give a tag and those that do are most often those giving negative comments. I cannot think of a single tag that I have gotten more than a dozen times, but I have played thousands of games. So, while well-intended, I think this would not benefit people much at all.

Have you checked the ratings you received? You have good strategy, quick and friendly tags all over the first page of your ratings. On the first page, almost every 2nd rater gave tags to you.

I think that generally there are more thoughts put in those ratings that have tags attached to them than to the ones without tags. These are usually not the 'let's give everyone 5s' type. Agreed, everyone receives negative comments as well, but usually only a few (unless they are given for a reason).

Also, I think that if implemented, it will encourage players to rate others and to use tags more often.

Yes, I do occasionally look at my tags.
At first, more people (including myself) gave tags, but it was kind of a "fad" that died out. Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

PLAYER, he specifically mentioned your "first page" of ratings...those are your most recent ratings. So it's obviously not a fad, at least amongst your most recently completed opponents.

I use a tag in probably 70% or more of my opponents.

[pmchugh]

Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

[/quote]

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3. Although I don't mind the suggestion would be nice if added but not essential.

[drunkmonkey]

Sure, a lot of people don't use tags, and a lot of people just leave 5 stars across the board no matter what, but that doesn't mean they're useless. If one person leaves a tag of "Rude" or "Deadbeat", it could be a fluke. But what if, say 20 people have left those tags in the last few months? It could be useful information. I like the idea. For the reasons I just stated, I think 2 stipulations should be added:

1) Only tags left in a certain time frame should be noted. People can change, and a rude player who gets his act together shouldn't be punished for his old ways.
2) There should be a minimum # of the same tag before they're displayed. You shouldn't be flagged with poor tags because you ran into a couple jerks recently.

[PLAYER57832]

I want to be clear. I really do not have a problem with this idea. I just am not too sure it will fix anything.

I think most people deserve good ratings, because most people here play reasonably, etc.

The problem with bad ratings is not for people like myself who have a few thousand games, it is for those just starting out and who wind up playing one of the few jerks, getting an undeserved bad rating. That said, that has always been an issue.

[Woodruff]

Sure, a lot of people don't use tags, and a lot of people just leave 5 stars across the board no matter what, but that doesn't mean they're useless. If one person leaves a tag of "Rude" or "Deadbeat", it could be a fluke. But what if, say 20 people have left those tags in the last few months? It could be useful information. I like the idea. For the reasons I just stated, I think 2 stipulations should be added:

1) Only tags left in a certain time frame should be noted. People can change, and a rude player who gets his act together shouldn't be punished for his old ways.
2) There should be a minimum # of the same tag before they're displayed. You shouldn't be flagged with poor tags because you ran into a couple jerks recently.

Very good additions.

[Jatekos]

Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3.

I am not so sure.Tags like complainer, deadbeat, poor strategy, bad teammate and silent are also popular for certain players, especially towards the end of the scoreboard.

Although I don't mind the suggestion would be nice if added but not essential.

No, not essential, just provides useful info.

[Jatekos]

Sure, a lot of people don't use tags, and a lot of people just leave 5 stars across the board no matter what, but that doesn't mean they're useless. If one person leaves a tag of "Rude" or "Deadbeat", it could be a fluke. But what if, say 20 people have left those tags in the last few months? It could be useful information. I like the idea. For the reasons I just stated, I think 2 stipulations should be added:

1) Only tags left in a certain time frame should be noted. People can change, and a rude player who gets his act together shouldn't be punished for his old ways.
2) There should be a minimum # of the same tag before they're displayed. You shouldn't be flagged with poor tags because you ran into a couple jerks recently.

1) I oppose this one, for the same reason as I would not like 'Give Ratings a Lifetime or Fill Zone' to be implemented. Simply, the more ratings and the more tags the better. The result is less biaised, and more accurate, because they reflect more people's opinion.
Yes, there are rude players, but why would we want to hide them? If they get less rude then their ratings and their tags will also reflect the change. This is obviously a gradual process, if they have been rude for long (I think this is not something someone playing normally should worry about).
By the way, this info is already available, but on several pages of ratings. I only intend to highlight the most important ones. If someone has been rude / friendly recently, then their ratings already reflect their attributes, I believe.

2) Is there a minimum number of ratings to be achieved before the current averages are displayed for the rating of different attributes?

[pmchugh]

Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3.

I am not so sure.Tags like complainer, deadbeat, poor strategy, bad teammate and silent are also popular for certain players, especially towards the end of the scoreboard.

You can usually spot them guys anyway, I suppose it gives a little meaning to the rating number.

[Jatekos]

Now, most people only use tags when something extraordinary happens.

Would you say that the good strategy, quick and friendly tags you received mostly (on your first page) were given because of extraordinary circumstances, and they are wrongly describing your behaviour?

To be honest I'm pretty sure 80% of people will have those three rating as their top 3.

I am not so sure.Tags like complainer, deadbeat, poor strategy, bad teammate and silent are also popular for certain players, especially towards the end of the scoreboard.

You can usually spot them guys anyway, I suppose it gives a little meaning to the rating number.

It would help to spot them more easily and to prepare for their actions in advance if you play with them.

[blakebowling]

I like this.

Other opinions?

[40kguy]

This was already suggested.

[blakebowling]

Find me the thread and I'll merge them. I just found this on the bottom while cleaning up the forum.

[Jatekos]

Here you go.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=121753

[blakebowling]

Merged

[patsfan12]

popcorn

[Dukasaur]

I'm in favour.

They might not be entirely accurate, or give you an enormous amount of information, but I think they give a rough-and-ready summation of what kind of player you are.