I think it might specifically be inaccurate to stop people chasing admins if they're able to identify a particular report. After all it is just meant to be a long term trend.
That makes sense. Thanks dogie.
Topic: Add decimal to Reported Posts Accuracy (Read 511 times)
That makes sense. Thanks dogie.
It would just kick the can down the road.
Lets do a little caluclation on this. Assuming all your 417 reports are handled (unlikely) and exactly 98% are correct. That leaves us with 408.66 good and 8.34 bad reports or 409 and 8 rounded. In order to reach 99% you need 383 more(!) (792 total) good reports without a single bad one.
In order to reach 98.1 % you need 5 more good reports, for 98.2% 28 more, for 98.3% 54 more.
Which is, for now an improvement, but only for a while. Once you reach 2940 good our of 3000 total reports (assuming 98%, all handled again), you would need 333 good reports for that sweet 98.1% to show up.
Its not that I have a problem with this, but you will run into this problem again.
Lets do a little caluclation on this. Assuming all your 417 reports are handled (unlikely) and exactly 98% are correct. That leaves us with 408.66 good and 8.34 bad reports or 409 and 8 rounded. In order to reach 99% you need 383 more(!) (792 total) good reports without a single bad one.
In order to reach 98.1 % you need 5 more good reports, for 98.2% 28 more, for 98.3% 54 more.
Which is, for now an improvement, but only for a while. Once you reach 2940 good our of 3000 total reports (assuming 98%, all handled again), you would need 333 good reports for that sweet 98.1% to show up.
Its not that I have a problem with this, but you will run into this problem again.
The easier way to prevent this problem would be to show something like "X reports [y good, z bad, 0 pending since our mods rock!]".
But as you said the inaccuracy may be intentional.
It would just kick the can down the road.
Lets do a little caluclation on this. Assuming all your 417 reports are handled (unlikely) and exactly 98% are correct. That leaves us with 408.66 good and 8.34 bad reports or 409 and 8 rounded. In order to reach 99% you need 383 more(!) (792 total) good reports without a single bad one.
In order to reach 98.1 % you need 5 more good reports, for 98.2% 28 more, for 98.3% 54 more.
Which is, for now an improvement, but only for a while. Once you reach 2940 good our of 3000 total reports (assuming 98%, all handled again), you would need 333 good reports for that sweet 98.1% to show up.
Its not that I have a problem with this, but you will run into this problem again.
Lets do a little caluclation on this. Assuming all your 417 reports are handled (unlikely) and exactly 98% are correct. That leaves us with 408.66 good and 8.34 bad reports or 409 and 8 rounded. In order to reach 99% you need 383 more(!) (792 total) good reports without a single bad one.
In order to reach 98.1 % you need 5 more good reports, for 98.2% 28 more, for 98.3% 54 more.
Which is, for now an improvement, but only for a while. Once you reach 2940 good our of 3000 total reports (assuming 98%, all handled again), you would need 333 good reports for that sweet 98.1% to show up.
Its not that I have a problem with this, but you will run into this problem again.
I think it might specifically be inaccurate to stop people chasing admins if they're able to identify a particular report. After all it is just meant to be a long term trend.
Theymos, would it be possible for you to add a single decimal (make it 98.1% instead of 98%) to allow us to track our accuracy better?
I know seeing the number change 10x more often would motivate me a lot more, and I don't think it would take too long to implement.
Thanks for the consideration.
Jump to: