Pages:
Author

Topic: Activity & new membergroup limits - page 59. (Read 242442 times)

legendary
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1022
June 19, 2013, 10:42:19 PM
time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)
I don't like it.

It embodies the assumption that any post above once per day (averaged over two weeks) is not contributing; which I do not agree with.

At the very least number of posts per day should be increased, e.g. min(time * 28, posts).

And you should consider more sophisticated metrics such as sum of f(x) over all two-week periods, f(x) being x / (1 + sqrt(x/14)) or x / (1 + x/28).

Time spent logged in will also be useful to include as a component.
Now let's take the indefinite integral of that function...

Challenge accepted!

Code:
                                         3/2
                             2 Sqrt[14] x
28 Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x] - 14 x + --------------- -
                                    3
 
  392 Log[14 + Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x]]

Or

28(x-28log(x+28))

I had to use an integrator of the first, the second was easy to do by hand.

YOUFORGOTYOURCONSTANT!

A complex solution that is well thought out. I have an issue with this though (besides being too complex) it does not address the fact that it will reward trolling kids with plenty of free time instead of more mature contributors who actually add value in their discussions and posts.

I would like to see what you have implemented theymos incorporated with a points system which the community can upvote or downvote individual posts based on content. Similar to Reddit and Hacker News.

The idea is to discourage posts with no relevance to the wider community and reduce the number of flamewars and trolling.

Think of it as community driven forum moderation.

but mob upvote/downvote kills diversity, and new ideas, entrenches to much of the normative. We wan't the tails of the bell graph, gotta take the good with the bad
donator
Activity: 848
Merit: 1078
June 19, 2013, 09:09:54 PM
time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)
I don't like it.

It embodies the assumption that any post above once per day (averaged over two weeks) is not contributing; which I do not agree with.

At the very least number of posts per day should be increased, e.g. min(time * 28, posts).

And you should consider more sophisticated metrics such as sum of f(x) over all two-week periods, f(x) being x / (1 + sqrt(x/14)) or x / (1 + x/28).

Time spent logged in will also be useful to include as a component.
Now let's take the indefinite integral of that function...

Challenge accepted!

Code:
                                         3/2
                             2 Sqrt[14] x
28 Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x] - 14 x + --------------- -
                                    3
 
  392 Log[14 + Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x]]

Or

28(x-28log(x+28))

I had to use an integrator of the first, the second was easy to do by hand.

YOUFORGOTYOURCONSTANT!

A complex solution that is well thought out. I have an issue with this though (besides being too complex) it does not address the fact that it will reward trolling kids with plenty of free time instead of more mature contributors who actually add value in their discussions and posts.

I would like to see what you have implemented theymos incorporated with a points system which the community can upvote or downvote individual posts based on content. Similar to Reddit and Hacker News.

The idea is to discourage posts with no relevance to the wider community and reduce the number of flamewars and trolling.

Think of it as community driven forum moderation.
legendary
Activity: 3416
Merit: 1912
The Concierge of Crypto
June 19, 2013, 09:03:50 PM
So, I'm already a hero (just not yet). hehehe.. Just need to post once every 2 weeks. But I already post every other day.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 1000
0xFB0D8D1534241423
June 19, 2013, 09:01:05 PM
time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)
I don't like it.

It embodies the assumption that any post above once per day (averaged over two weeks) is not contributing; which I do not agree with.

At the very least number of posts per day should be increased, e.g. min(time * 28, posts).

And you should consider more sophisticated metrics such as sum of f(x) over all two-week periods, f(x) being x / (1 + sqrt(x/14)) or x / (1 + x/28).

Time spent logged in will also be useful to include as a component.
Now let's take the indefinite integral of that function...

Challenge accepted!

Code:
                                         3/2
                             2 Sqrt[14] x
28 Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x] - 14 x + --------------- -
                                    3
 
  392 Log[14 + Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x]]

Or

28(x-28log(x+28))

I had to use an integrator of the first, the second was easy to do by hand.

YOUFORGOTYOURCONSTANT!
donator
Activity: 848
Merit: 1078
June 19, 2013, 08:57:29 PM
Checking out the new features. Nice idea.
staff
Activity: 3290
Merit: 4114
June 19, 2013, 07:55:34 PM
Well, I registered back in march. Going to take awhile to rank up. Doing it all over again, YES!
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4794
June 19, 2013, 07:34:08 PM
I like this new system actually.  So if I post once per two weeks I get +14 activity??  (until I surpass my current post count)

Yes, if your current post count is higher than your activity, then your activity will grow by +14 for every two weeks that you have at least one post.

Once your activity is equal to your post count (if ever), then your activity will increase every two weeks by the lesser of 14 or the number of new posts you make.
sr. member
Activity: 457
Merit: 250
Look for the bear necessities!!
June 19, 2013, 07:05:14 PM
I like this new system actually.  So if I post once per two weeks I get +14 activity??  (until I surpass my current post count)
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
June 19, 2013, 06:26:27 PM
time = number of two-week periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time * 14, posts)
I don't like it.

It embodies the assumption that any post above once per day (averaged over two weeks) is not contributing; which I do not agree with.

At the very least number of posts per day should be increased, e.g. min(time * 28, posts).

And you should consider more sophisticated metrics such as sum of f(x) over all two-week periods, f(x) being x / (1 + sqrt(x/14)) or x / (1 + x/28).

Time spent logged in will also be useful to include as a component.
Now let's take the indefinite integral of that function...

Challenge accepted!

Code:
                                         3/2
                             2 Sqrt[14] x
28 Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x] - 14 x + --------------- -
                                    3
 
  392 Log[14 + Sqrt[14] Sqrt[x]]

Or

28(x-28log(x+28))

I had to use an integrator of the first, the second was easy to do by hand.
hero member
Activity: 569
Merit: 500
June 19, 2013, 05:21:20 PM
Literally, these titles mean nothing to me. Just like the above post. You can have all the status in the world. But, it doesn't mean I trust you because you have been a long term user.
This is useful for newbies and spotting scammers. But, they'll find a way to constantly scam, they always do.

It is just Vanity. scammers scam cuz there is a way and there is always dumb dumbs to be scammed
staff
Activity: 3290
Merit: 4114
June 19, 2013, 04:17:42 PM
Literally, these titles mean nothing to me. Just like the above post. You can have all the status in the world. But, it doesn't mean I trust you because you have been a long term user.
This is useful for newbies and spotting scammers. But, they'll find a way to constantly scam, they always do.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 4794
June 19, 2013, 04:06:03 PM
Was a hero member, now I'm a Sr. Member.  In about 6 more weeks I'll be a hero member again.  In the end, none of these labels really mean much to me.  I can glance a persons post history and in about 10 seconds I can tell if it is worth paying attention to anything they say.  I'm happy with the new system even though I've lost my "hero" status, of course I was happy with the old system as well.  It really isn't worth getting worked up about.
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
June 19, 2013, 03:31:08 PM
so this is just to make status more harder to get?
KS
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
June 19, 2013, 03:19:45 PM
I guess it's only the "new heroes" who are feeling the "loss".

Does being a hero member really matter? I know many sr. members who do great things and don't care about hero membership.

I'm only judging by the comments in this thread. I does make sense to me that, after being recently promoted to "hero" status, some do feel cheated, as they equate post count to mojo or sth. (bad example, don't flame  Cheesy )
KS
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
June 19, 2013, 03:17:31 PM
Also, even though it didn't seem to be used much, I think the "trust" button is useful. you can still see it in the profile but it's much more useful next to the activity/email/whatnot.
The trust rating is visible next to posts when you're browsing the marketplace subforum, as it has been since inception.

It was also visible "everywhere" (my impression). I think it's also useful for non-marketplace threads, a better indication of character than post count/activity/longevity.
legendary
Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000
June 19, 2013, 03:05:53 PM
I guess it's only the "new heroes" who are feeling the "loss".

Does being a hero member really matter? I know many sr. members who do great things and don't care about hero membership.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
June 19, 2013, 03:02:24 PM
Also, even though it didn't seem to be used much, I think the "trust" button is useful. you can still see it in the profile but it's much more useful next to the activity/email/whatnot.
The trust rating is visible (edit: only) next to posts when you're browsing the marketplace subforum, as it has been since inception.
KS
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
June 19, 2013, 02:53:21 PM
I guess it's only the "new heroes" who are feeling the "loss".

This new system strikes me as a complicated way to classify members. Why not simply display the post count/registration date/logged-in days? It's not ideal, but "activity" in its current form is in fact rather a measure of longevity or time spent on the forum than activity - like posting.

Also, even though it didn't seem to be used much, I think the "trust" button is useful. you can still see it in the profile but it's much more useful next to the activity/email/whatnot.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
June 19, 2013, 02:31:00 PM
If I post 1 message per fortnight for the next year, I'll get hero. That incentive to contribute.
Uh ... no. 

1 post every 14 days would be + 1 activity every 14 days.   So in a year you would have +26 activity.

If you post 14 times per 14 days then yes you will be a "hero" in a year.  Then again if you are still around regularly posting week after week for a year doesn't it make sense that you should be.   You haven't gamed anything.
Actually dogie was right about this particular point.

Note he said "I". He already has 834 posts so if he now posts once a fortnight for 52 weeks he'll have time = 33, posts = 860, activity = min (33*14, 860) = 462 = hero.

That's one of the things I tried to solve with my modification.

Old System:
Post 400 times in any amount of time (even a single day) = "hero"
it was 500 posts per hero in the old system.

Agreed.  That would be horrible.  stackoverflow has a badge where you need to login for 100 consecutive days.  Despite regularly posting questions and answers there for years I always miss a day.  It annoys the crap out of me.
Tell me about it. Eventually I realized "WTF do I care about this badge" and restored order to my life.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
June 19, 2013, 02:22:41 PM
I think that it should be more of something like this:

time = number of 1-day periods in which you've posted since your registration
activity = min(time, posts)

That'd make people feel paranoid about always getting a post in each day, I think.

Agreed.  That would be horrible.  stackoverflow has a badge where you need to login for 100 consecutive days.  Despite regularly posting questions and answers there for years I always miss a day.  It annoys the crap out of me.

I think 14 day period if fine although you might want to consider 7 day or 30 day simply because it a more logical unit when people think about time.
Pages:
Jump to: