Around my 26th post I noticed that my member status had changed. Brad was going to go back and find my old post numbers (under a different account name) though. I don't know if that had anything to do with it.
Printable View
Around my 26th post I noticed that my member status had changed. Brad was going to go back and find my old post numbers (under a different account name) though. I don't know if that had anything to do with it.
I think something like "new member, active member, hyper active member" would better illustrate what those title really are.Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnDev
I think the junior member/member/senior member/etc. label has value. It indicates that the person posting has been around and contributing to the forum. I'd be likely to be less skeptical of any claims they may make, and I'd expect others to do the same for me.
Thanks for getting me fixed up, Brad :)
I forst thought one was Elite because he had written books on the subject, or was well-known in the domain, because I remember criticizing a book with a guy I realised later was the author !!! ;-)
But I was wrong, I had to meet Xeon to know that.
I keep on rating good thread, because it can be useful when you make a search and want to see thread which gave good results to the poster.
Regards,
Marina
Well, who except Xeon would qualify for this ? ;)Quote:
hyper active member
Yes, I think that is very good practice. Unfortunately many of the questions are just straight : "look it up in MSDN" type. Sometimes though the discussion is really interesting and I tend to give the thread a good rating, just to show my appreciation.Quote:
I keep on rating good thread, because it can be useful when you make a search and want to see thread which gave good results to the poster.
What I really hate on the other hand are people who post a question and rate it 5* on the spot, just to attract people's attention. The best thing would be that you should not be able to rate the threads which you posted initially, maybe.
I hate that too, but it would also prevent them to give a rating to a good answer ...Quote:
Originally posted by Yves M
What I really hate on the other hand are people who post a question and rate it 5* on the spot, just to attract people's attention. The best thing would be that you should not be able to rate the threads which you posted initially, maybe.
The problem with that is if you give a bad rating for a bad answer, you are not able to correct it later for a good answer (and the opposite). So it's sometimtes hard to give a relevant rating.
Yes that's true too :/
I think that if you recieve a bad answer on your question, you should just wait till either somebody gives a good one or the thread disappears. I'm not sure that giving a bad score is actually of any help, except maybe in cases where the post is already rated as good and you definitely don't think so.Quote:
The problem with that is if you give a bad rating for a bad answer, you are not able to correct it later for a good answer (and the opposite). So it's sometimtes hard to give a relevant rating.
I think the bigger question would be is it a bad answer or a poorly worded or poorly explained question. If the answer does not provide the specific fix for the one instance, is it bad?
Ancient Mariner, that sounds like an already discussed subject...
Is it a bad answer or a badly formuled question? ;-)
We will always have both.
Marina
The whole problem with the current rating system, though, is that you're not actually rating the answer - you're rating the entire thread.
What if you have a thread full of 50 posts that are nothing but whining, flaming or just plain wrong. But buried in there is a single post that gives a good answer. IMO, that post may be good but the thread as a whole isn't.
Have you seen any threads that are 50 posts long here ? ;) Well, except for the poll, most questions / answer posts tend to be quite small.
And even if there is a heated discussion, it might be worth reading / interesting to read. For example the flames on general C++ between A Mai and everybody else mostly do not contain real "answers" to the question at hand but are still quite interesting to read.
The problem of badly formulated questions is of course acute. There seems to be a natural selection process going on whereas badly formulated questions never get any answers anyways. Sometimes they do though and the answer may be way off what the poster intended. It is his duty then to refine the question and provide missing information.
Well, in the best of worlds, bad questions don't exist, just bad answers :p
On another forum, namely http://holonet.swrpgnetwork.com (sorry about the publicity ;) )there has been user rating implemented. However, this has led to many many threads on users being pissed off and rating down the user for revenge. I think we have to find another way to assess a person's competence.