Reading Rating Complaints

This post was deleted by request of the author.

I'm still as right from the start not to happy with it as well. Maybe I still didn't get the point with it, really, but I used it very rarely these days, just because I'm still not sure about it when to use which button! Sure, those few spam thingies during the last months were easily rated blood-red, but there are few posts in my view, that are not worth reading. I dont know about the others, but as for me, I'm reading every new topic and every post and I think there are about none to be ignored cause they're off topic or such. So if I use the rating system I should have to give green ones to every post I read. Thats not the way its meant to be, right? So what to do? I personally tend to give greens only when I'm sitting here at my desk, laughing my ass off cause of what I read right at that moment, or if it makes me cry right away. Obviously this is not happening too often....

After decades of construction my website is finally up an running: www.kkds.de

i tend to handle it the same way. really great laughing post = green, span = red. i hardly use yellow and i rarely rate at all. no real clue 'bout the rating system, still not shure i really got it.

If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything. -- Mark Twain

Sure, those few spam thingies during the last months were easily rated blood-red

And those who wrote them would have to post a lot of good stuff to get a single star after this shit. I would call this success.

but there are few posts in my view, that are not worth reading.

Then they shouldn't get any red votes. Our forums are currently full of posts worth a read, so where's the problem? Only because our lack of a*holes should we increase the voting standards so you get ranked down for a post that's good but not god-like?

The voting and stars are nothing but a way for NAO to determine trust into a user. Looking at the users and their stars, it worked so far. Non-idiot users gained their couple of stars very quickly, and everything after that is mere decoration anyway.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

If I'd rate all posts most of them would just get yellow 'cause I don't think there are so many special ones. And informative, problem concerning, geeky stuff or posts like "I use ..." aren't worth to be rated, are they?

"Sie wollen nichts anderes. Sie wollen kämpfen! Sie sind Soldaten! Fucking Wahnsinnige!" - Noel G.

This post was deleted by request of the author.

I don't think it's about what we want to see...
I'm more interested into Livesense, music, movies and stuff so these are the posts I regularly read and, if it isn't an average post, also rate green. Maybe I rate a long post, too because I see the writer cared a lot but if I don't think it's too special I'll rate it yellow. If a post is too short I just rate it if it's damn cool.

Other users here are apart from me interested also or just in technical stuff and they'll rather rate these posts then the others so their should be a balance...

"Sie wollen nichts anderes. Sie wollen kämpfen! Sie sind Soldaten! Fucking Wahnsinnige!" - Noel G.

This post was deleted by request of the author.

And my geekyness always stays at 80% for some reason. I wonder how to make that go up as well.

The longer you've been with us, the longer it takes to move that factor, because NAO becomes more and more sure of exactly how geeky you are. Maybe you simply are 80% geeky!

I compare my stats when theirs and I still cannot figure out why I have 2 white stars and 1 yellow star. Its a bit confusing to me.

Eighty percent of your star assignment depends on how many post you wrote, how often they were rated, and what these ratings looked like. So compare these figures on the user profile to find out why someone's cooler than someone else :) The remaining twenty percent are Proprietary NAO Voodoo ©

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

I'm more interested into Livesense, music, movies and stuff so these are the posts I regularly read and, if it isn't an average post, also rate green. Maybe I rate a long post, too because I see the writer cared a lot but if I don't think it's too special I'll rate it yellow.

That's a perfectly fine way of voting. I see no problem that interest mixes in. If a post is interesting for you, go ahead and give it a green.

The only thing you can actually do wrong with the current voting system, is to vote RED for disagreement (which isn't as bad when it happens because a red vote isn't as negative as a green vote is positive). Green votes, yellow votes and even no votes at all, will all get the post writer ranked up.

Everyone will move up the ranks (even without any rating) unless he behaves badly and gets many reds. Everyone. If you're good, you'll just move on faster. But every non-idiot who stays on NAO for a long time will eventually end up with three white stars. The reason why we should vote, especially "young" users, is to get them out of the relevant posting limits (no or one star) as soon as possible.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

It seems like not many people take the extra time to rate many posts these days. I think most people don't wish to take the extra time or just don't remember to do it.

I rather believe that the lack of new users and morons is the reason for people not voting so much anymore.

There's not much use in voting up a three star NAO general, because they have already proven themselves.

But whenever I see a user with few or none stars posting, I vote almost every time, because then every vote counts a lot for the other guy. One green rating of a high ranked user will probably get them another rank.

What would be nice would be a rating system where your post is judged by how many times its actually read, or maybe by how many replies it gets.

Remember that the whole point of this is to stop abusers. If we would consider counting the reads, someone could push themselves up the 3 white stars with little effort. Replies would be harder to abuse, but I don't really know if there's a direct link with the quality of one's post and the allowance of more power for that particular user. Example: Someone posts an advertisement for his business, other users lead a enraged discussion about spam and how it doesn't belong here in that very thread. => Spammer gets more power.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion