Development Cycle Archive
Thread: SWG Forum Ranking Changes...
"star wars"
GarVa wrote:
The star system does work, and has been proven to work in other communities. It will take time for things to even out in a community that is already established (as I said above) but also as I said above, that is why the ranks will have similar privileges,so no one can "grief" you out of being to edit your post for example.Also remember this is just forum ranks it has nothing to do with ingame so will not effect your game play.
The "loop hole" for rating is being fixed, and as I also stated, we have a way to track (and soon getting a way to rank) people who one star obsessively. It is also a community thing so if the whole community is giving your post less importance that is the community, and that is what the stars are, a community tool. You can at any time choose to ignore the star rating system by going into your personal preferences and changing it. (you will still see the stars beside names/post but will not hide any post)
Seems to me that "one star bandits" are a different animal than most. I don't think they care what title you give them, like hackers they will probably wear the title as a badge of pride.
Simply giving them a "1-star bandit" title will not deter these people. Also how will this prevent all of the upset people who are leaving the game and the forums who decide to maliciously attack the rankings of those who are remaining. I think you will need to not only give a title to one star bandits.....but remove their forum privledges. It is very annoying to spend the time to craft a well thought out post, just to have some hater 1 star it, regardless of its affect on gameplay, it is annoying.
Heineken
ArianSix wrote:
LOL, this puts a whole new twist on the phrase:
"star wars"
-- A6
*slaps forehead*
GarVa wrote:
The star system does work, and has been proven to work in other communities. It will take time for things to even out in a community that is already established (as I said above) but also as I said above, that is why the ranks will have similar privileges,so no one can "grief" you out of being to edit your post for example.Also remember this is just forum ranks it has nothing to do with ingame so will not effect your game play.
The "loop hole" for rating is being fixed, and as I also stated, we have a way to track (and soon getting a way to rank) people who one star obsessively. It is also a community thing so if the whole community is giving your post less importance that is the community, and that is what the stars are, a community tool. You can at any time choose to ignore the star rating system by going into your personal preferences and changing it. (you will still see the stars beside names/post but will not hide any post)
With respect GarVa /snog. 
Seriously, the staring system is not working, anywhere. On other forums I've visited a lot of the "haves" (ie: high rankers") keep the other people down because they can. /shrug
GarVa wrote:
This is an answer to similar questions...
Most forum users have an average rating of 2.5 (right in the middle) with about 20 % over 3.0 and only 5% below 1.5. This alone proves that one star bandits (even for those that have stated that they get one starred a lot) do not have much of an effect. We KNOW that this is the average rating and that is why we posted this thread, the ratings are high at the moment but as I said we will lower the requirements if necessary. I am waiting for my metrics to update this week then we will decide ifwe want to lower the minimum rating for the star rated tree.
As I also said we are working with lithium and if possible we WILL have a "one star bandit" rating
) I'd have a rating of around 4... as it is, I'm at 3.If Joe Newbie registers on the forums, makes some replies, gets some decent ratings, and finally comes up with a really awesome idea about some PvE GCW stuff for a thread of his own, posts it on the GCW forum at the wrong time of the day, and gets this one post one starred into oblivion, he might just not start any new threads anymore. It can be really discouraging, as you have an obvious visual aid that, apparently, nobody likes you or wants to hear anthing you have to say, even if your average rating is 2.5, rounded up to 3.
It isn't like 3/5 is going to make him feel better anyway.. that's boarderline failure by many standards, even a failure by some tougher standards in life.
IgescaStorm wrote:
A question for us non-english people: What do the "Avarage message rating" and "avarage message rating given" mean?
Which is what? Could you please change that so, that we can understand it?
Given means: i gave it or somebody gave it to me?
Confused...
Average message rating - how many stars you have
Average message rating given - how many stars you give people
One of the reasons I dislike the ranking system today and typically only target people that offend me ("first" posts, profanity, rants, etc. as 1-star) is because when I click a rating number to rate a post it goes off to the server and the page reloads -- and it doesn't reload to where I was. With the time I have to read the forums, I want to read/post, not wait for page reloads and figure out where I was.
I'm not complaining. I'm just trying to offer insight into why people may/may not participate. To get better forum ranking participation, at the least, it would be nice if after clicking on a rank that you get returned to where you were in the page after it reloads.
