Weighted Ratings

[ajax]

Some people, like Mary Ball and Nikos Moraitakis, have suggested

good ways to make "well done" ratings more important. My idea follows

along this way, without having to remove non-subscribers rating

rights.

 

Average (photos uploads, non-subscriber) member's rates would stay

as they are. Subscriber's rates would have weight 2 (count as 2 Av.

member when computing means). In the same way, weights for other

categories could be as follows:

No photos uploaded: 0.5

Comment added (min character, grammar check): 1.5

Hero: 1.5

 

These could be cumulative factors, so a subscriber that doesnt

upload nor comment wouldn't benefit much. A average user that leaves

good comments would have much more impact than a non-uploader,

numeric ratings addict.

 

I already see some problems (e.g., user status change, server load)

in this approach.

Advantages (stimulates comments and subscriptions, rewards heroes,

etc) may be good enough to make this worth. What do you think? Is

this possible?

[scott bulger]

I would add a "Curators" level. Curators could be chosen by the staff and number anywhere from 50-100. They could represent a good cross section of the photo.net community and carry a weighted level of 5. I am now, and always have been, a strong supporter of weighted rating and Curators. I think this is probobly the least drastic solution that would have the greatest results in ressurecting old classics and sorting through the chaff to find the wheat in the current submissions.

[ajax]

That would really be great, Scott. Hand picked curators (aka elves) really should have greater ratings weights. I thought of merits, but favoring skilled people is very important.

[nikos]

The curator concept is very good, and it will indeed result in better stuff floating up to visibility.

 

On the other hand, it does not enhance the community-wide participation in any way. I would like to see a mechanism where users' ability to imbalance the community is not determined by how much time they have to waste but also by the level and quality of their involvement in the community. I can't tell if this can be achieved better by using weights, or awarding power for participation.

 

The important thing is that photo.net needs mechanisms that further motivate the community, steering people into more creative use of the site. So, while I'd like to see the curator concept implemented, my opinion is that it solves only part of the problem.

 

Last but not least, I think we should establish as a base of our discussion that photo.net is a damn good site as it is. What it has achieved so far is pretty impressive, and I'm referring to community involvement, not hits and page views. I have watched it evolve since 1998 and I'm confident that next year there will be better stuff around. So, I'm not moaning and bitching about things, just trying to cultivate some good ideas for PN's continuing evolution.