Pages:
Author

Topic: A formula for determining Worthiness of Poster (WoP) - page 2. (Read 555 times)

jr. member
Activity: 156
Merit: 1

Without further ado, here's the formula:

WoP = (Merit + 1) / Posts x Activity

Pretty simple, really.

Here's how mine would look currently:

nutildah = (1061 + 1) / 2980 x 1162 = 414


I just add a bracket on your formula because it's confusing. Great idea though.
The Formula should be;
WoP = [(Merit + 1) / Posts] x Activity
 Remember MDAS?
legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
I think , you should test the formula first in some random samples.

Name:   soniclord
Posts:   1997
Activity:   1092
Merit:   1002
Position:   Legendary
Date Registered:   April 05, 2015, 07:12:51 AM
Last Active:   July 16, 2018, 03:21:23 AM


WoP = (Merit + 1) / Posts x Activity
        =(1002+1)/1997*1092  =548.46

By your formula,soniclord is more worthy poster than all of the below quoted.

Its a rough guide for determining the potential chance that what somebody has to say is going to be interesting. Of course its not an absolute measurement of anything in particular,
sr. member
Activity: 742
Merit: 395
I am alive but in hibernation.
I think , you should test the formula first in some random samples.

Quote
Name:   soniclord
Posts:   1997
Activity:   1092
Merit:   1002
Position:   Legendary
Date Registered:   April 05, 2015, 07:12:51 AM
Last Active:   July 16, 2018, 03:21:23 AM

WoP = (Merit + 1) / Posts x Activity
        =(1002+1)/1997*1092  =548.46

By your formula,soniclord is more worthy poster than all of the below quoted.

Quote
jgarzik: 481
OgNasty: 477
Gyrsur: 408
marcus_of_augustus: 402
mprep: 385
Hal: 368
Dabs: 340
Vitalik Buterin: 307
QuestionAuthority: 276
-ck: 272
Vod: 243
Vlad2Vlad: 167
hilariousandco: 110
philipma1957: 101

legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 2061
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
For some odd reason i get almost the exact same result with your formula.

morvillz7z = (175+ 1) / 184 x 182 = 174,08 





I wonder who is worse..a newbie with 2600 posts and zero merit or a legendary member with 28000 posts who has earned only one merit since the system was introduced.....

I'd say, they are equally bad.
Just recently, came across a legendary account with hundreds of posts (2013/14), consisting of only one/two or three words.

Anyway, we should be very careful what we wish/ask for, because recent developments and the following mess, i'm sure, has not achieved the prettiest results so far (referring to boards being swamped with merit beggars and advice givers).
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 6403
Blackjack.fun
I wonder who is worse..a newbie with 2600 posts and zero merit or a legendary member with 28000 posts who has earned only one merit since the system was introduced.....

Maybe theymos will extend this 1 merit requirement to all ranks, so you can keep your rank but you're not allowed to have a signature unless you earn 1 merit from other members.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18711
I would be much more interested in scores base on earned merit and not total merit, removing the airdropped merit and thereby leveling the playing field.

Vod's BPIP also uses a formula for most recognized posters - on a similar theme, but is based on merit, activity and trust: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/how-recognized-are-you-in-the-bitcointalk-world-4799468
legendary
Activity: 2814
Merit: 2472
https://JetCash.com
I tend not to use these ranking systems. I try to build my own ratings based on knowledge, area of interest, communication skills and fluidity of post content. For example, I would be more interested in a Bitcoin miner discussing the problems in Venezuela, even if he had minimal merits, than a high score member posting about bounties.

I'm considering making a list of topic stars to help me find posts.
legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
I developed this formula a month ago but forgot to post it here. Its a rough guide for determining the potential chance that what somebody has to say is going to be interesting. Of course its not an absolute measurement of anything in particular, but I'm always on the lookout for members that have extremely high (or extremely low) scores. It doesn't apply so well to old, inactive accounts; especially those that stopped posting before the merit system was introduced.

Without further ado, here's the formula:

WoP = (Merit + 1) / Posts x Activity

Pretty simple, really.

Here's how mine would look currently:

nutildah = (1061 + 1) / 2980 x 1162 = 414

Obviously Legendaries are gonna have the highest scores, but the point is, if somebody has a score above 100, they're probably worth listening to, and if somebody has a score below 10, they're probably not. Future refinement of the formula would include dividing the score by the rank level (1=Newbie, 7=Legendary) to make things a bit more even.

I became fascinated when I saw one particular poster had 2600+ posts, zero merit and such a low activity. Now with the new merit requirements my fascination is reinvigorated: who can find a score lower than krizpogi18 (0.084)? If you find one I may very well issue you a merit for your work!

Here's a list I made about a month ago, so the scores have probably changed a bit since then, tried to include some of the biggest names in the forum for your reference:

theymos: 1292
ibminer: 1225
phantastisch: 1074
Flying Hellfish: 958
charleshoskinson: 833
Satoshi: 829
eduffield: 756
Gavin Andresen: 734
ProfMac: 715
Damelon: 628
GameKyuubi: 600
Cyrus: 575
genjix: 553
jgarzik: 481
OgNasty: 477
Gyrsur: 408
marcus_of_augustus: 402
mprep: 385
Hal: 368
Dabs: 340
Vitalik Buterin: 307
QuestionAuthority: 276
-ck: 272
Vod: 243
Vlad2Vlad: 167
smooth: 138
Quickseller: 134
TradeFortress: 127
hilariousandco: 110
philipma1957: 101
Gleb Gamow: 77.9
Amph: 67.4
spiderlee: 17.7
amanarora_1: 1.20
katerinaliisa: 0.24
leoliln45: 0.18
krizpogi18: 0.08
Pages:
Jump to: