Development Cycle Archive

---

Thunderheart wrote:

Please let us know what you think about this.

Thanks!

---

---

Arg0nus wrote:

Again....For those people ignoring posts.....

The people who work on the forum are a COMPLETELY different department.What is so hard to understand? This is really bugging me.

Think of it this way. Would you ask the Human Resources Dept of a manufacturing company to go out to the line and fix problems? No. They don't have the skills.

And for your information...the Developers ARE working on the bugs.

---

/agree /agree /agree

BUT: there are still problems with the forum! Like save login not working (It isvery very unprofessional to have a function live which does not work)

As a web developer I don't understand why they can't just have a flag in a cookie which logs you on! it is our problem if we save login on a public PC, as with every other site just have a disclaimer, SOE love them so much!

Message Edited by Gam8it on 08-20-2004 01:25 PM

---

Gam8it wrote:

---

/agree /agree /agree

BUT: there are still problems with the forum! Like save login not working (It isvery very unprofessional to have a function live which does not work)

As a web developer I don't understand why they can't just have a flag in a cookie which logs you on! it is our problem if we save login on a public PC, as with every other site just have a disclaimer, SOE love them so much!

---

I like the system, but I have a realitively low star ranking, at "only" 3.3. Starsider has a problem with one-star bandits, even threads posted in memory of players or players family who have died get one-starred. Posts get one-starred somply because they're RP posts. Plus what happens if someone has a grudge against me and goes round one-starring, as has happened before?

---

RazerWolf wrote:
I like the system, but I have a realitively low star ranking, at "only" 3.3. Starsider has a problem with one-star bandits, even threads posted in memory of players or players family who have died get one-starred. Posts get one-starred somply because they're RP posts. Plus what happens if someone has a grudge against me and goes round one-starring, as has happened before?

---

nothing does because if you read the post its average message rating given *gasp gasp gasp*

garva? is a good concept but that star ranking system i have serious doubts on, considering how many people have 2 or more accounts on here? how will you effectively counter the one star problem or those helping each other fluff there accounts? I understand it will average itself over time. Putting up a tag saying this guy is a one star bandit will be used like a badge of honor on here so that will really not slow things down much if at all.
Hinting at patience over the above has not been a strong suit of the devs, sony or the players of this game as i have seen none of you show such patience. As i recall Jedi was supposed to be insanely hard to acheive at first and yet holocrons popped up within a few months. Not to mention all those lovely nerfs. So you will understand if i do not buy into the it will balance overtime thing.

Thou i do think anyone that complains over their rank on a forum and whines forever on it is a bit mental.I do belive you are about to open up a whole new can of worms here. You should of already seen that, since some on here are all ready wigging out and didn't read the part of read the whole post first before... part of your post.

Good Luck either way, i'll have the crate of asprin waiting, with a i told you look on my face.

1. Statistical significance: don't show the post's star rating until at least 10 ratings have been given. Otherwise, the post will be rated 4 times, and then never rated again. What's the current proportion of message views to ratings? I assume it's very low. Every other moderation system says something like "waiting for 10 reviews before displaying rating", becauseyou should getasufficiently large sample before reporting statistical results. Personally, I've viewd 88,000 messages, and even if I've only readone quarterof them, I've only given about 200 ratings, so I've rated onepercent of the messages I've read.
   


2. Accurate rating display: show theEXACT rating number in a small font right beside the graphical representation, so people don't have to hover over it to find out that the 3 star graphical representationis actually a 2.75 numeric rating. By rounding up the average for the graphical representation, you discourage people who would give it a boost (they would have boosted it if they knew it was really 2.75), and you encourage people who would give it a low rank (they would have left it alone if they had known it was already 2.75, but they saw three stars and thought it deserved less).
   


3. 
   
   Math:No one will everachieve a 4.9 star rating. If 1000 people view a post, and 100 people rate it (RARE to have mor than even 10 ratings on a post!),I'd bet my title thatat least 3 will one-star it just for fun, or because they don't agree with the person's idea. Contrary to what you've claimed, one-starring isn't always detectable one star bandits. Your bandit identification method will NOT be 98% correct, so no one will ever have a 4.9 average star rating.