BuzzerBeater Forums

It's not a real vendetta - he was joking.

50/50 Depends on the day

If it's easy access for you what's the avg rating of everyone in BB? Or should we ask Charles as he's usually better with numbers.

I can find out - Charles would have to run a db query, I have no clue how.

It isn't about "up" or "down" wich, I would agree, is the same as 1 or 5. It is about "positive rating" or not at all, like in Facebook. And your total positive feedback from your posts would be accumulated (maybe in the space where your country/team is, if you add some "levels" users might reach with certain amount of positive feedback it could be even better).

In this fashion, good post will continue to be signalized with positive feedback. Just like users who already get consistenly 5 balls.

On the other hand, we would avoid this not so unsual "forum bullying". If someone doesn't make a good intervetion he doesn't recieve positive feedback and that's it. I think some users don't really care about the ball ratings but some others do and I have seen many post in different forums talking about it, and I don't think that producing such frustration in usually active users is something good for any community, because some of them just decide to not to post.

Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 6/15/2010 6:31:39 PM

The problem with including only positive feedback is that a broken clock is still right twice a day and someone who posts 30 times a day on the help forum and is wrong and misleading 29 times a day but manages to sneak one semi-correct answer in there every 24 hours will receive a ton of positive feedback. Under your proposed system such a user (one might say a "shaq-like manager) would have a considerably higher total rating than a senior user who posts once every couple weeks but drops Solomon-like wisdom in his or her posts.
A "like"-only system would reward pure volume over any sort of quality which is the exact opposite of what the help forum in particular needs.

In addition, without people providing a counter balance a post which was 100% demonstrably wrong need only convince a single player who has played one game thus far to click "like" to make it appear as if the information is good information even if the other 40 people who have read it think its crap.

I think that this rating system is as good as any. Either keep it as is, or get rid of it and let discussions in the threads be used as the gauge of accuracy. Personally I am in favour of less inaccurate guessing and blabbing on from users who have no idea what they're talking about and who just spread guesses and misinformation and more actually informative discussion. I don't have strong opinions one way or another about the best way to accomplish such a goal but I suspect it involves abolishing the internet.

I agree that having a "like" only would simply reward users that post more often.
Perhaps there could be a compromise, for example, a post can be liked, and then someone can come along and dislike it. However, it can never go below 0.

So if there is a post, and I click to say I like it. And 10 other people click to say they like it. Then the rating will be +11. However, 11 people can them come along and all click dislike and it will take the rating back to 0. However the "dislike" option will not be available for posts that are currently on 0.

Good idea. There is no need to go below 0. At the moment post below 3 is basically considered minus already. Despite the ratings, it still takes time to get to know the forum posters. Some of the "old teams" (in estonia atleast) have come to the forum with rookie questions or really wrong answers to basic questions and sometimes newcomers pick up stuff really quick.

since i read this thread i am 1 balling everyone, now it is pretty cool even when it is a waste of time.

What a thread!

5 ball me please. :D

there you go