The W
Views: 95587390
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
17.4.14 2206
The W - the-w.com Site Feedback - Let the carnage continue
This thread has 9 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 6.95
Pages: 1 2 Next
(805 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (30 total)
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.41
New rating feature added to the forum page... this shows the instant rating of that thread at the time that the last poster posted in it.



Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
Promote this thread!
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.53
Well, let me be the first to bring this thread down a level or two. It'll be interesting to see if there are any threads that can maintain a seven around here. I'm not sure that's quite possible since everybody seems to think just about everybody is a 5 or lower.
Matt Tracker
Scrapple








Since: 8.5.03
From: North Carolina

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.15
    Originally posted by BigDaddyLoco
    Well, let me be the first to bring this thread down a level or two. It'll be interesting to see if there are any threads that can maintain a seven around here. I'm not sure that's quite possible since everybody seems to think just about everybody is a 5 or lower.


Even if you achieve the heights of rankdom -- become the toppermost of the poppermost -- in the end, you're still just a wiener.

(JR voice) Wiener born and wiener bred and when I die, I'll be wiener dead.(/voice)




"To be the man, you gotta beat demands." -- The Lovely Mrs. Tracker
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.83
So... here's the thought.

See, if a bad poster starts a thread, it will have a low rating. To avoid raising the rating of the thread, people with higher ratings should avoid responding to it. In theory, this should result in people actually having an incentive to do what they should be doing - not feeding the trolls.

Also, if I get bored (or if Chris does) we can implement a filter to view only threads with a rating above (x) like we did for the posters.

The moral of the story is: Don't be afraid to give out good ratings if they are deserved. If everyone only rates negatively, all of the posts will have low ratings.



Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 5 hours
AIM:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.39
I find it amusing that the folder with the lowest ratings for the threads seems to be the Site Bashing folder. Perhaps there is some sense that too much negativity can be a bad thing.



Toil not to gain wealth, cease to be concerned about it. Proverbs 23:4

blogforamerica.com
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.06
    Originally posted by Guru Zim
    So... here's the thought.

    See, if a bad poster starts a thread, it will have a low rating. To avoid raising the rating of the thread, people with higher ratings should avoid responding to it. In theory, this should result in people actually having an incentive to do what they should be doing - not feeding the trolls.

    Also, if I get bored (or if Chris does) we can implement a filter to view only threads with a rating above (x) like we did for the posters.

    The moral of the story is: Don't be afraid to give out good ratings if they are deserved. If everyone only rates negatively, all of the posts will have low ratings.


In theory it makes sense, but I think a lot of times people just don't like what someone is saying in a particular thread and will just stick them with a low number. I find it hard to believe that the curve is so bottom heavy around here.
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.83
+--------+-------+
| rating | count |
+--------+-------+
| 0 | 1078 |
| 1 | 280 |
| 2 | 220 |
| 3 | 191 |
| 4 | 124 |
| 5 | 149 |
| 6 | 175 |
| 7 | 339 |
| 8 | 358 |
| 9 | 269 |
| 10 | 570 |
+--------+-------+
11 rows in set (0.01 sec)


+---------------------+----------+
| title | rating |
+---------------------+----------+
| Site Feedback | 6.862500 |
| Ladies Only | 6.692000 |
| Guest Columns | 6.586786 |
| CRZ's World | 5.990000 |
| Politics | 5.814850 |
| Random | 5.632632 |
| Test Forum | 5.583103 |
| Basketball | 5.572453 |
| Baseball | 5.529878 |
| Football | 5.495798 |
| From the KZiM Tower | 5.368209 |
| Hockey | 5.330000 |
| Video Games | 5.080268 |
| Site Bashing | 4.980000 |
| Wrestling | 4.943096 |
| Banished | 3.957143 |
+---------------------+----------+
16 rows in set (0.36 sec)








Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 16 hours
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.06
I stand corrected. It's the middle that is sorely lacking. It looks like you are either loved or hated around here, although I will say that my theroy of people not liking what people say in a certain thread may hold some water by the 1078 zeros handed out.
emma
Cherries > Peaches








Since: 1.8.02
From: Phoenix-ish

Since last post: 22 days
Last activity: 1 day
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.47
Couple of things ...
    Originally posted by Guru Zim
    +--------+-------+
    | rating | count |
    +--------+-------+
    | 0 | 1078 |
    | 1 | 280 |
    | 2 | 220 |
    | 3 | 191 |
    | 4 | 124 |
    | 5 | 149 |
    | 6 | 175 |
    | 7 | 339 |
    | 8 | 358 |
    | 9 | 269 |
    | 10 | 570 |
    +--------+-------+
    11 rows in set (0.01 sec)
So that's a summary count of all the "votes for" each rating? Does that include the variously banned, deleted, spindled, mutilated & never-allowed-back users? (If so that would by definition cause some bottom-heavy skew.)

'Tis true -- if I look at the summary of ratings I've given out, I've got a nice bell curve in the upper half, & a bottom-skewed curve in the lower half. (Which includes a bunch of zeroes for people who have long since vanished.) I tend not to give out too many middle numbers -- for some reason I tend to just leave most of those unrated.

The sort by forum is very interesting. ;->
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 5 hours
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    Originally posted by Guru Zim
    So... here's the thought.

    See, if a bad poster starts a thread, it will have a low rating. To avoid raising the rating of the thread, people with higher ratings should avoid responding to it. In theory, this should result in people actually having an incentive to do what they should be doing - not feeding the trolls.

    Also, if I get bored (or if Chris does) we can implement a filter to view only threads with a rating above (x) like we did for the posters.

    The moral of the story is: Don't be afraid to give out good ratings if they are deserved. If everyone only rates negatively, all of the posts will have low ratings.
That's a TERRIBLE idea! Every time I make fun of somebody, the thread average will be artificially raised!

(Also, if all I do is click on the chevrons, since I never see the forum pages I'll never see the ratings, making the feature useless to me)

I take it now that we have two CPUs you're going to resume writing all these ballbusting, proc-rich features we love so much?



CRZ
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.83
Well, not if you put it that way.

Read the changelog to see how I did it. It's not dynamic - it is basically coded like a trigger in the newthread and newreply routines.

But, the spell checker may be finished at some point, yeah.



Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
Downtown Bookie
Morcilla








Since: 7.4.02
From: The Inner City, Now Living In The Country

Since last post: 147 days
Last activity: 1 day
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.36
    Originally posted by Guru Zim


    +---------------------+----------+
    | title | rating |
    +---------------------+----------+
    | Site Feedback | 6.862500 |
    | Ladies Only | 6.692000 |
    | Guest Columns | 6.586786 |
    | CRZ's World | 5.990000 |
    | Politics | 5.814850 |
    | Random | 5.632632 |
    | Test Forum | 5.583103 |
    | Basketball | 5.572453 |
    | Baseball | 5.529878 |
    | Football | 5.495798 |
    | From the KZiM Tower | 5.368209 |
    | Hockey | 5.330000 |
    | Video Games | 5.080268 |
    | Site Bashing | 4.980000 |
    | Wrestling | 4.943096 |
    | Banished | 3.957143 |
    +---------------------+----------+
    16 rows in set (0.36 sec)







The fact that (excluding the Banished folder) the lowest rated section on this wrestling message board is the wrestling folder means we can add one more item to the list of life's greatest ironies.



Patiently waiting to be Stratusfied.
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3219 days
Last activity: 2999 days
AIM:  
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by Downtown Bookie
      Originally posted by Guru Zim


      +---------------------+----------+
      | title | rating |
      +---------------------+----------+
      | Site Feedback | 6.862500 |
      | Ladies Only | 6.692000 |
      | Guest Columns | 6.586786 |
      | CRZ's World | 5.990000 |
      | Politics | 5.814850 |
      | Random | 5.632632 |
      | Test Forum | 5.583103 |
      | Basketball | 5.572453 |
      | Baseball | 5.529878 |
      | Football | 5.495798 |
      | From the KZiM Tower | 5.368209 |
      | Hockey | 5.330000 |
      | Video Games | 5.080268 |
      | Site Bashing | 4.980000 |
      | Wrestling | 4.943096 |
      | Banished | 3.957143 |
      +---------------------+----------+
      16 rows in set (0.36 sec)







    The fact that (excluding the Banished folder) the lowest rated section on this wrestling message board is the wrestling folder means we can add one more item to the list of life's greatest ironies.


Somehow, that does not surprise me at all.



mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 290 days
Last activity: 290 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.50
As always, I'd like to thank Guru and CRZ for all the improvements they have made recently on the board. I would like to put forth one suggestion however. Perhaps a 48-72 hour 'Getting to Understand the Board' policy on new members, where by they can post after they become part of the board, but they can't begin a thread until they've been part of the board 2-3 days. It would partially-eliminate the current 'I hate Scott Keith so I'm going to the Wienerboard and starting a thread about him' trend that has begun, and it could lessen repetitive threads. And it would eliminate the occassional nitwit flaming the board with 35 threads before Guru or CRZ can ban them and then have to clean up their mess.



If only Paul Jones had brought in General Skandar Akbar as a technical military advisor, Paul Jones' Army could have thwarted the McMahon infidels and prevented the collapse of wrestling civilization.
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.83
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    As always, I'd like to thank Guru and CRZ for all the improvements they have made recently on the board. I would like to put forth one suggestion however. Perhaps a 48-72 hour 'Getting to Understand the Board' policy on new members, where by they can post after they become part of the board, but they can't begin a thread until they've been part of the board 2-3 days. It would partially-eliminate the current 'I hate Scott Keith so I'm going to the Wienerboard and starting a thread about him' trend that has begun, and it could lessen repetitive threads. And it would eliminate the occassional nitwit flaming the board with 35 threads before Guru or CRZ can ban them and then have to clean up their mess.


I've thought about this in the past, but there have been a number of insightful first posts that would have been missed had this been implemented. Unfortunately, we have to keep the bad with the good...



Willful ignorance of science is not commendable. Refusing to learn the difference between a credible source and a shill is criminally stupid.
Sec19Row53
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Oconomowoc, WI

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 6 hours
Y!:
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.07
    Originally posted by Guru Zim
    I've thought about this in the past, but there have been a number of insightful first posts that would have been missed had this been implemented. Unfortunately, we have to keep the bad with the good...

Would they have been missed, or would they just have been delayed? I know this cuts both ways, but my hunch is that a poor post is less likely to come back, while a good one is more likely to do so.



[It's where I sit]
DJ FrostyFreeze
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: Hawthorne, CA

Since last post: 23 hours
Last activity: 12 hours
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.95

Or it might discourage new posters from even going through all the trouble of waiting for a 2-3 day probation period just to post in the first place.

But I like the over-all idea behind it all.



OH SNAP

redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 290 days
Last activity: 290 days
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.50
I think I was a little fuzzy on my original thought: My idea for the 48-72 hour wait was for someone to begin new threads, while during that period they would be allowed to post in already open threads.



If only Paul Jones had brought in General Skandar Akbar as a technical military advisor, Paul Jones' Army could have thwarted the McMahon infidels and prevented the collapse of wrestling civilization.
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3219 days
Last activity: 2999 days
AIM:  
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    I think I was a little fuzzy on my original thought: My idea for the 48-72 hour wait was for someone to begin new threads, while during that period they would be allowed to post in already open threads.


That is a pretty cool idea. The Wrestling Forum seems to be getting overrun with really bad posts started by people with less than 10 posts.



mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
Net Hack Slasher
Banger








Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3401 days
Last activity: 1821 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.40
    Originally posted by Guru Zim
    +--------+-------+
    | rating | count |
    +--------+-------+
    | 0 | 1078 |
    | 1 | 280 |
    | 2 | 220 |
    | 3 | 191 |
    | 4 | 124 |
    | 5 | 149 |
    | 6 | 175 |
    | 7 | 339 |
    | 8 | 358 |
    | 9 | 269 |
    | 10 | 570 |
    +--------+-------+
    11 rows in set (0.01 sec)


One step closer to my sugguestion of actually being able to see the break down the votes of your own rating


    +---------------------+----------+
    | title | rating |
    +---------------------+----------+
    | Site Feedback | 6.862500 |
    | Ladies Only | 6.692000 |
    | Guest Columns | 6.586786 |
    | CRZ's World | 5.990000 |
    | Politics | 5.814850 |
    | Random | 5.632632 |
    | Test Forum | 5.583103 |
    | Basketball | 5.572453 |
    | Baseball | 5.529878 |
    | Football | 5.495798 |
    | From the KZiM Tower | 5.368209 |
    | Hockey | 5.330000 |
    | Video Games | 5.080268 |
    | Site Bashing | 4.980000 |
    | Wrestling | 4.943096 |
    | Banished | 3.957143 |
    +---------------------+----------+
    16 rows in set (0.36 sec)


Ineresting, Hockey bottom of the sports list. Anti-Canadian, naaa probably just Zed not much of a hockey fan therefore the forum doesn't have the benefit of his big score. What really surprised me is how the Politics forum IS NOT at the bottom of the chart, what I've seen if you go off on a Political rants your ratings takes a hit as bad as a Dixie Chick song radio airplay in the deep south LoL... At first I was surprised Wrestling forum is at the bottom but then I thought that most trolls would go to wrestling or site bashing forum so it makes sense for them to bring the rating down.

Speaking of that RedSoxNation idea is a good one, kinda like buying a gun with the waiting period and if you have to wait 2 or 3 days maybe they would just feel it's not worth it to troll around... If it's a quality poster they'll wait 2 or 3 days and no thread is so important that can't wait that long.

(edited by Net Hack Slasher on 31.12.03 1751)


Christmas is the one time of year when people of all religions come together to worship Jesus Christ. - Bart Simpson
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 6.95
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: Walgreen's W?
Next thread: Fourteen Million Wasted Clicks
Previous thread: tWoooooooo
(805 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Could us unkempt masses possibly get a Copa Mundial forum under sports so we can get the predictions/injury reports/hooliganism condensed into one easy-to-consume product? Danke.
- James F'n X, Oh glorious G-Money (2002)
The W - the-w.com Site Feedback - Let the carnage continueRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.123 seconds.