Reputation and Thread Ratings

Status
Not open for further replies.

Greebo

N9017H - C172M (1976)
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
10,976
Location
Baltimore, MD
Display Name

Display name:
Retired Evil Overlord
This software contains two very important features which make it especially well suited for use in building a virtual community: Reputation, and Thread Ratings.

Thread Ratings
This option allows you to give your opinion on the quality of a particular thread, by rating it with 1 to 5 stars. You cast your opinion on a thread while reading the thread. At the top of the thread, on the right hand side of the screen, you will see a Rate Thread link, which opens up a mini window with the five ratings. Pick one, and click "Vote Now", and you're done.

Your vote will be averaged with the votes of others to give a general average star rating to the thread. You can then see, at a glance, when looking at the list of threads, what your fellow community members here at Pilots of America think of the thread.

Thread Ratings apply only to threads, not posters.

Reputation
This is by far the more powerful and more complex concept here at Pilots of America. In establishing a virtual community, each member has a perception of other members that can be vastly different from that member's self-perception.

Reputation is a means by which the community at large can express their perception of an individual member without making that opinion public.

When a person makes a post, you have the ability to record a positive or negative hit on that person's reputation. You do this by clicking on the Reputation Icon
reputation.gif
by that person's post.

When you click this icon, you are prompted to give your Approval or Disapproval for that post. That approval or disapproval adds or subtracts from the poster's reputation. A person with a low enough reputation will get a graphical representation in the red
reputation_neg.gif
by each of their posts, while a person with a high reputation will get a nice bright green bar. A single
reputation_neg.gif
or
reputation_pos.gif
indicates a fairly neutral value, while many
reputation_pos.gif
reputation_pos.gif
reputation_pos.gif
symbols indicate a high positive and many
reputation_neg.gif
reputation_neg.gif
reputation_neg.gif
indicate a very LOW reputation.

How much your approval or disapproval affects another person's reputation is defined by your reputation power. Your reputation power is based on your own reputation level, your activity level here (number of posts) and how long you've been a member. Note the difference between reputation power and reputation level. Level is what the community thinks of you. Power is how much influence you have on another posters level.

Here are the rules:
- New posters start with a reputation level of 10.
- Posters with less than 50 posts have no reputation power. (New accounts can not be created just to affect another's reputation)
- You must have a reputation level of 10 or higher for reputation power to be effective.
- You start with a reputation power of 1.
- You gain 1 point of power for every 100 points of reputation gained from others.
- You gain 1 point of power for every 1,000 posts made.
- You gain 1 point of power for every 365 days you've been a member of this site.
- You may only give or take away reputation 10 times a day.
- Once you affect a users reputation, you must affect 10 other users reputations before you can affect the first user's again.
- Administrators (myself included) do not have any extra power. However, we are not subject to the 10x a day or the 20 user spread limitations.

As you can see, your reputation is derived almost entirely from the opinion of others, so it is important, as a community, for you to not only pay attention to your OWN reputation, but to express your opinion of other poster's reputations regularly. But remember - you only have 10 reputation hits a day. If you are neutral about a specific post, don't waste a reputation hit on it. Save your power for posts which you particularly approve of or disapprove of.

Be careful with your reputation. It matters!

Enjoy!

The Management
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Chuck, for explaining that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim
Might be my only chance for a good reputation...LOL Bill M.
 
Oops - two things I forgot about reputation:

If you click the reptuation icon
reputation.gif
on your own posts, you will be shown your numeric reputation level.

And if you hover your mouse over a reputation bar (
reputation_neg.gif
or
reputation_pos.gif
) you will see a text description of your reputation based on your level.

These are the levels and descriptions:
-999999 - is infamous around these parts
-50 - can only hope to improve
-10 - has a little shameless behaviour in the past
0 - is an unknown quantity at this point
15 - is on a distinguished road
25 - will become famous soon enough
50 - has a spectacular aura about
100 - is a jewel in the rough
175 - is just really nice
250 - is a glorious beacon of light
500 - is a name known to all
750 - is a splendid one to behold
1000 - has much to be proud of
1500 - has a brilliant future
2000 - has a reputation beyond repute
 
Last edited:
So ...

It'll be a while before this kicks in - given that we need 50 posts to affect someone's reputation, right?

(And this gets me one more post closer! :D )
 
That is correct - it will take each user some time before they can influence anyone elses reputation.

But, and I know you're kidding, I feel obliged to point out that spamming for the purpose of getting your post count up will not be looked upon kindly by the management. :D
 
Chuck, I am questioning the utility of the reputation and user title functions. Thinking back to another webboard that we used to frequent, I can think of a lad in Texas that would be rated very highly in user title (provided he kept on topic and civil, a doubtful provision...) because he absolutely had to answer every message. At the same time I think it would look very funny for a certain multi-thousand hour FAR Guru and University Aviation Director to be classified a rookie, even briefly. Similarly with reputation: how should I react differently if I am replying to a person rated "really nice" as opposed to someone who is "a glorious beacon of light?"

In my opinion these classifications offer little and have the potential to mislead a newbie. I don't feel strongly about this - certainly we should let things run and see what happens - but if I were to vote now, I would vote to remove these functions.

I also have a concern regarding how much of your time it will take to administer these functions. The longer we can keep you in a "still burning" state (as opposed to burned out) the better the POA board will be.

-Skip

ps: That's TWO posts! Only 48 more... *just kidding here!*
 
Skip Miller said:
Chuck, I am questioning the utility of the reputation and user title functions. Thinking back to another webboard that we used to frequent, I can think of a lad in Texas that would be rated very highly in user title (provided he kept on topic and civil, a doubtful provision...) because he absolutely had to answer every message. At the same time I think it would look very funny for a certain multi-thousand hour FAR Guru and University Aviation Director to be classified a rookie, even briefly. Similarly with reputation: how should I react differently if I am replying to a person rated "really nice" as opposed to someone who is "a glorious beacon of light?"

Skip - these are some very good remarks, and they have come up before with respect to other forums.

Let me split them into two categories as they really do represent two separate functions of the software.
User Titles
These are virtually meaningless when used 'as is', except as a reflection of how much an individual poster likes to talk. And I think I know who you're talking about and yes, they would certainly have a high ranking title - but on the other hand - he would also probably have a very LOW reputation...more on that below.

The titles I came up with are, perhaps, too directly aviation related - and that thought occurred to me as I made them up - but since they're easily changed I went ahead with them for now. There are really three options we have here, as "forum ranking by post count" is an automatic function of this software.

We can:
- Change the titles to something less aviation related and more related to your gabbiness
- Remove their relevance completely by enabling user editable titles (i.e. You get to make up your own, like I've changed mine - right now that function is reserved for the management team)
- Remove titles based on forum counts by making only one title or - revert to the original values of "Junior Member", "Member" and "Senior Member" (0, 30, 100 were the post counts for those)
(Or we can mix and match the above).

Personally I favor coming up with a new list of titles less aviation related as, in a mature audience, I've found that the titles provide for little moments of "Woo, new title" that are fun and harmless. Custom user titles are ok too - but then I cringe at the idea of a self-styled expert (who's really an idiot) giving themselves a title that's REALLY misleading...

Reputation
Reputation is reflective of the communities opinion, in general, of an individual poster. A positive reputation is a positive reputation...how positive I think should have little bearing on your reaction. (Certainly you should post with equal respect to all other members, regardless of reputation.)

Where reputation kicks in is more how you perceive that user: If the community has said, "This person is disreputable" by assigning a broadly low rating, then you get a visual cue (via the red bars) that this person should probably not be taken at their word.

I'm sure we can ALL think of users from other forums who's reputation, were they to conduct themselves in the same manner here as they have in other locations, would be very low. (No direct references please. This is a new, clean slate for everyone.)

I would hope that, in conjunction with visual thread ratings, that it would be clear to new people that "this person is widely disliked by the community" or "this thread is worthless" rather than thinking "Wow, I wonder if everyone here is like this or approves of this behavior/person/thread."

I also have a concern regarding how much of your time it will take to administer these functions. The longer we can keep you in a "still burning" state (as opposed to burned out) the better the POA board will be.

Very little, actually. Reputation is automatic based on user input. So are titles and thread ratings. The hard part, setting up the right kind of environment, is actually nearly done. (Which is why I think Bruce leaked the word out before I expected it hehehe)

The hard part long term will be moderation and monitoring, and as POA grows in size, we'll be working to bring on impartial, unbiased moderators to keep the peace without censoring based on anything other than violation of the rules of conduct.

ps: That's TWO posts! Only 48 more... *just kidding here!*
:eek:
Note to self: Ban Skip. (KIDDING!) :D
 
For User Titles ...

How about making them user-editable but encouraging the user to enter their "level of aviation ability". Like Enthusiast, Student, Private, Instrument, Commercial, ATP?

I know another forum that has done that, and it helps evaluate the quality of the advice by knowing the level of attainment of the speaker.
 
I like that idea. Although that information could be in the signature as well.

-Skip
 
Chuck, a question about reputations. In my CP, there is a box called "latest reputation received" and there are two threads listed. However, my points have not changed and to my knowledge the people whose names are connected to them cannot yet influence reputation anyway. Am I misconstruing what this box is? I inferred it would be a notation of what threads people felt were noteworthy enough to vote on.
 
You are correct. Anyone can bestow their approval or disapproval, and a record of the most recent cases are displayed in your user control panel.

Its just that approval or disapproval has no affect on your overall reputation level until the person bestowing it has attained the ability to use their own reputation power.

I'm rather interested in seeing how this shapes up over time. The more people who post and the more people who exercise their reptuation power, the more credible the reputation system will be. Right now very few users have reputation power that aren't part of the management. That will change in another week or two - then we'll see what happens. :)
 
I'm really following this to see how it works - and to see whether or not to include it in other sites!
 
Chuck, I guess I understand the technicalities of the reputation thing but am a little confused regarding the real world application. Under what circumstances is it to be expected that I would "award" a positive rep?

For example, I would have no problem giving certain posts a negative rating but when do I "award" a positive rep rating? Am I rating the civility of the post? Am I rating whether the position was well articulated whether I agree or not with the conclusion? Am I rating the "knowledge" base? (if so, what about students who are learning?) Or is it if the thread peaks my interest, in other words the topic? (if so, who gets the rep - everyone in the thread or just the original poster?)

Take this thread for example. Nothing in it offends me so should I award everyone a positive rep? You provided the best technical answer so do I give you positive rep only? Skip and others provided thoughtful commentary so do I give them a positive rep?

I could go on but I think you get my quandry here.

Barry
 
bstratt said:
Chuck, I guess I understand the technicalities of the reputation thing but am a little confused regarding the real world application. Under what circumstances is it to be expected that I would "award" a positive rep?
Not Chuck nor do I play him on TV. I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express recently and I'm considerably better looking. Just ask me. ;)

Reputation points are yours to do with as you please. My personal use is to hand out 'I approve' if a post struck me as well thought out, polite and stopped to make me think a little. I'll also hand out for good questions that spark a nice thread with lots of participation.

I haven't really used the 'I disapprove' option yet but I see myself using this for a particular post that really goes against the spirit of the PoA site and its Rules of Conduct. This means that, while it's not a technical violation, it's not necessarily what we're trying to achieve here.

In both cases, I never consider whether I agree or disagree with the content of the post. In my opinion, it's irrelevant what my personal feelings are toward the topic.

The reputation system is YOUR opportunity to let the user know how you felt about their post (they can see it on their User CP (Control Panel)) without actually posting anything. FYI, this is NOT an anonymous system. While no comments are necessary, the log goes into the user's area and he/she can see who approved/disapproved what and, if you leave a comment, why.
 
Barry,

Your ability to applaud or raspberry a post by exercising your reputation power is for your use entirely at your discretion. I can't tell you how to rate a post - at least not without undermining the purpose of the reputation system.

You can use it to issue positives about posts you particularly like, you can use it to disapprove of posts you don't like, you can balance it somewhere in the middle, you can decide not to use it at all.

The reputation system only limits:
1) How many approvals or disapprovals you can give in a day (10); and
2) How often you can issue an approval or disapproval to a single person (1 in 20).

How you use that influence, or whether you use it, is up to you. :)

Always willing to muddy the waters some...

CH :)
 
Brian Austin said:
Not Chuck nor do I play him on TV. I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express recently and I'm considerably better looking. Just ask me.
Hey, Brian - are you better looking than me??
 
You ARE better looking than me! I may have to give you a Disapproval for that!!!



(The above suggestion that Greebo would use reputation as a punative measure for personal appearances being better than his own is made in jest and should not be taken to construe that Greebo or any other Pilots of America management team member would use their own reputation power in anything less than a serious manner. Unless they want to. ;) )
 
Brian Austin said:
The reputation system is YOUR opportunity to let the user know how you felt about their post (they can see it on their User CP (Control Panel)) without actually posting anything. FYI, this is NOT an anonymous system. While no comments are necessary, the log goes into the user's area and he/she can see who approved/disapproved what and, if you leave a comment, why.

Brian, where do you look to see who added to your reputation? I see that some of my posts elicited some kind of response, but I can't see who or what, and also what does the little square in the first column mean?

(It's actually a good sign that I'm asking about this little stuff. It means I have more or less figured out how to navigate the board now! :))

Thanks.
 
Toby:

Click on User CP. It should be right there in the main section.
 
Toby said:
Brian, where do you look to see who added to your reputation?
Not Brian, but go to the "User CP" page. There is a box on the right that says "Latest Reputation Received." If someone has given you reputation points, there will be a link to that person and to the msg that prompted them to do it.
 
The links take me to the three posts I placed in the first place, not to any other person. You're talking about the column labeled, "Thread"?

And also, what are the little boxes to the left of the thread names?
 
Toby said:
The links take me to the three posts I placed in the first place, not to any other person. You're talking about the column labeled, "Thread"?

And also, what are the little boxes to the left of the thread names?

The "Thread" column takes you to the post for which you received reputation.

The "Posted By" column has links to the user who gave you the reputation.

The symbol to the left of the thread will either be green, red, or grey.
reputation_balance.gif
- Means the user who gave you reputation had no Reputation Power at the time of the posting, and so their input had no affect on your Reputation Level.
reputation_pos.gif
- Means the user who gave you reputation had a positive effect upon your Reputation Level.
reputation_neg.gif
- Means the user who gave you reputation had a negative effect upon your Reputation Level.
 
Toby said:
The links take me to the three posts I placed in the first place, not to any other person. You're talking about the column labeled, "Thread"?

And also, what are the little boxes to the left of the thread names?
I don't know what the little boxes are. But yes, the link under "thread" should take you to your own posting. To the right, under where it says "posted by" is the name of the person who gave you the point(s).
 
????

Ken, I'm sorry, I must be looking in the wrong place. I see three columns: "Thread," "Date," and "Comment." I do not see "Posted by." To the right of "Comment" is just the right margin of the page.
 
Ah...you may not be able to see who gave approval or disapproval.

This is a good thing - it means you can use reputation without fear of it being known who gave good or bad marks.

Ken, myself, and the rest of the Management Team, of course, know all and see all, well, at least we see who gives US reputation plusses and minuses. :)
 
Greebo said:
The "Posted By" column has links to the user who gave you the reputation.

Chuck, this column seems to be missing from my page.

The symbol to the left of the thread will either be green, red, or grey.

Thanks! (I'll see if I can pass this color test. :))
 
Ahhh, I see. I found it under Control Panel aka User CP...there is now a grid entitled Latest Reputation Received. Based on the color of the box on the left side of the column entitled Thread you can tell the reputation that someone attached to the post...the name of the Thread appears just to the right of the colored box. A green box is good, a red box is bad. A grey box is neither good or bad, it means the person voting on your reputation did not yet have the power to affect another's reputation.

So, if someone with a bad reputation votes you a green box is that a good thing or a bad thing? Is there a "smile" that indicates rhetorical question? :<)

Len
 
A green box means that person added one or more points to your own reputation level (how many points they added is based on their reputation power). Red means they lowered your reputation level.

Details on how power and reputation level work are in the top post. :)
 
Oooh, oops, ok I misread your question.

A person with a "bad" reputation (less than 10) can not give or take away reputation. ;)
 
Greebo said:
Ah...you may not be able to see who gave approval or disapproval.

It appears that the average user can not see who voted on reputation.

Len
 
Toby said:
????

Ken, I'm sorry, I must be looking in the wrong place. I see three columns: "Thread," "Date," and "Comment." I do not see "Posted by." To the right of "Comment" is just the right margin of the page.
OK, as Chuck noted elsewhere, this apparently is a management function. Sorry to mislead you. I'm learning this stuff, too.
 
Ken Ibold said:
Oops. Ok. I'll shut up about this stuff and leave it to the pros.
Hey, no worries Ken. :) You know a student has to make some mistakes on their own even before they solo. :D
 
Greebo said:
...I feel obliged to point out that spamming for the purpose of getting your post count up will not be looked upon kindly by the management. :D

It's a good thing I read on down the thread, as I was just thinking I should bang out a couple hundred posts (copied to all forums of course) so I could get some POWER, having just gotten around to joining up:D.
-lance
 
lancefisher said:
It's a good thing I read on down the thread, as I was just thinking I should bang out a couple hundred posts (copied to all forums of course) so I could get some POWER, having just gotten around to joining up:D.
-lance

Hey Lance! Glad you made it here!

:D
 
Personally, I think the points thing is overblown. I mean, we all basically know each other. A carefully documented post is a carefully documented post- they take time and effort to craft. A WYSIWYG post is just that....flew off the fingers.

It does not take an ATP to craft a careful analysis. Sometimes the best analysis are from the INSTRUMENT STUDENTS. Some of the most grossly inapporpriate, ne deadly, comments came from a particular CFI now appellated "HWMNBN'd".

I suppose I should learn how to "give nachas" and to "downrate" a post. But I just don't think that's important. Enough people will learn to do that such that it'll have a "life of its own". And in this crowd I don't think it'll amount to a hill of beans.

Kinda reminds me of how the Pre-meds of the early 70s were concerned about every detail. Me: I was concerned about not becoming Infantry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top