Rating System Change

[CBRaoul]

Hi, I understrand that rating is important and agree it is not good that new users directly rate messages. But since you changed the system, I'm not able to rate messages anymore. Could somebody explain me that?

Thanks.

[Laura F.]

Hi Raoul,

I am not sure why the system did not allow you to rate messages, but I will investigate further to make sure others are not affected as well.  I have made a change and you should now be able to rate again.

Thanks for notifying me of this problem!

Regards,
Laura

[Anthony_de_Vries]

Maybe the first thing that could be done, is give some information about what the stars are supposed to mean?

The HELP now only says this: 

How do I rate a message?
Please take the take the time to rate helpful messages. To do so, log into the Forum and look for the Rate This Message (Thread) feature at the bottom of messages and threads.

Note: authors cannot rate their own messages and users may rate a specific message only once. All ratings are automatically averaged.

That doesn't say anything!

Does star scale go from:  "somewhat usefull"  to "superb", where all stars are positive?  Or is the scale going from negative to postive, where 1 star means that we'd rather not see posts like that?   I've been on these boards for a while, and I simply don't know....     Apparantly 1 star is something negative, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist....     The only thing I've learned is that people either want 5 stars, or nothing.  That seems to defeat the purpose of having 5 options....

[Ben]

Hi Anthony,

The thread Lauara cited in the initial post of this thread (with 147 posting) touches on most of the issues.

In my minds eye the main issue is the adjatives associated with the first gold bar where the term "proven" is associated with rating averages of 4.5 or better!

4.5 or better is the same as a 95% average. This would be the same as Suma Cume Laude. To maintain a 95% when one star ratings amount to a 20% grade means you have to have an extremely high number of 5-star ratings (since that is the ONLY rating that can help move the average above 95%) to make up the difference.

In that same thread Laura indicated that the current change of the rating system (to prohibit rating assignments by novices) is only a temporary fix.

In the long run I would like all rating to be viewed as possitive since voluntary contributions should not impune those trying to help.

Ben

[Anthony_de_Vries]

Hi Ben,

I read most of those 147 postsing...    But after your last one, I think I finally understand the problem.   If I understand it right, the problem is that if I rate your message with 4 stars, then I allready move your average away from 'proven'.  

But ehmm...   can't they simply change the threshold of 'proven' to a lower value?    

[Ben]

"

But ehmm...   can't they simply change the threshold of 'proven' to a lower value?    

"

"Lithium*" despite being a metal is not very flexible.

Ben

*Lithium is the software that runs the NI forums.

[Gabi1]

---

@Ben wrote:

"Lithium*" despite being a metal is not very flexible.

Ben

*Lithium is the software that runs the NI forums.

---

well, they need to change the name to Strontium then - much more brittle and less flexible than Lithium

[Conseils]

I replied with a quote to a survey on the star rating system a long time ago. It seems to have got lost in yet another system upgrade....

So I will; with tongue in cheek in respect of my previous comment, re-iterate the quote. I feel it hits the mark.

"Now the star belly sneetches had bellys with stars,
The plain belly sneetches had none upon thars.

Those stars weren't so big, they were really so small
you might think such a thing wouldn't matter at all.

But, ................"
"The Sneetches By Dr.Seuss"

I think McBean is visiting again.

I do agree with Ben on the way it could and probably should work......
I have had stars for things that were good and no stars for things that I thought were worth 10.... flamed for a 5 star answer that was wide of the mark (rightly in fact, do you know who you are?) and ignored for answers that I know are world class,,,, welll there must be at least one or two in the collection statstically speaking of course!!!!!

How about the stars you give, or the ratio of given to recieved or.......

P.S. I don't look for 5 star ratings any more; I only count 'BEST' on the far RIGHT  --------------------------------------->

[Enrique]

I like the one button approach. However, instead of a "Thank you", it can be something like "Recommended" or "This rocks!". So, nobody get "punished" by less than 5-stars rating, and great answers are highlighted.

We can get creative: "It compiles!", "Wired answer!", "Data flowing!"... you get the point.

[Ray.R]

Nice creative ideas Enrique.

Wow..  I must admit that this thread became quite interesting..  I didn't realize so many people didn't like the 5 star rating system.

This whole thing originated because of 1-star rating abuse.  Not necessarily to abolish ratings below 5-stars..  However, it's interesting to read how less than 5-stars are perceived..  I suppose it has to do with the fact that we give time to help others as well as enrich ourselves with the knowledge that is shared within the community.  Thus we don't expect to be (looking for a politically correct word...) bashed for not giving an accurate answer.  Innacurate answers can the result of the multi-cultural aspect of the forum.  English not being the first language for many of us.  So misunderstanding the question can happen..

One thing that is obvious, is taht this forum has evolved quite a bit.  And I must admit for the better.  It appears that the last thorn is the current rating system..  Not necessarily because of the number of stars, but rather because of their impact on the standing (as pointed out in a few earlier posts).

Thanks Laura!

RayR