Forum Levels

305pelusa

Quadruple-Digit Post Count
@305pelusa : not exactly - just a quick note that there more important things than "likes" competition. I have learned some of the best stuff here on the forum from users who even would not get in top 100.
No, this isn't that important. You're right. It's just a forum feature. That's why I asked about it in the "Everything Else" thread.

That doesn't matter though right? Could you imagine if Steve asked us something like "what do you think about having a nutrition log and training log section?"(which he has). And I just answered "that's not as important as training, motivation and help".

Do you see how it misses the point?

In fact, I only made the argument about using likes over posts AFTER Steve asked about what we thought. The initial thread was simply curiosity.

You're also misconstruing a lot of what I've said. No one said competition. The blurs are determined by meeting certain thresholds, NOT by having more than others.

Anyways, I don't feel like arguing and it doesn't seem like people even mind too much. So default is fine. Consider the thread closed.
 

Anna C

More than 5000 posts
Elite Certified Instructor
Yes, as I took it, the sidenote of @Pavel Macek being a commentary on social media in general as I took it, that "most likes" should not be the default beacon indicating highest quality of content of information sources, despite the FB/Instagram world trying to warp our brains and our behavior in that direction. A valid point. But the rest is also a good discussion.
 

Steve Freides

Forum Administrator
Staff member
Senior Certified Instructor
I thought I replied to this thread earlier today, but I must not have pushed the Post Reply button. In no particular order:

@305pelusa, IMHO, it's good, fine, normal, etc., to start a thread in order to start a discussion and then not contribute to that discussion further. I know I've done it many times in other places if not often here, e.g., just the other day, I asked a technique question on a classical guitar forum; it was a question about whether a certain right-hand stroke, known as "apoyando" in Spanish and "rest stroke" in English, was appropriate to use in a particular way in a specific piece of music. I didn't hold a strong opinion myself, it wasn't a piece I knew well, and I was just curious as to what others thought and why. In such a case, my only later response might be "thanks to everyone for their replies," and even that's not strictly necessary. Such a lack of response is not necessarily indicative of a lack of interest.

What are trophies? Well, yet another forum feature that is implemented out of the box, so I haven't disabled it but rather am trying to see if it's useful to us. When configuring tropies, I get a choice of criteria, e.g., I can base the awarding of a trophy on a whole list of criteria, only allow it to be awarded to members of certain groups, base it on numbers of posts, on Likes, Likes-to-Posts ratio, how long a user has been a member of the forum, what _language_ the user is posting and viewing in, and the list goes on and on and on and on. I can aware trophies to anyone whose name is Joe, should I choose to set it up that way, award a trophy on someone's birthday ...

The messages under our names are part of the User Title Ladder. The User Title Ladder can be based on Messages, on Likes, or on Trophy Points. And the entire Trophy thing can be disabled.

I could use Trophy Points to try to combine/balance Posts and Likes, then configure the User Title Ladder to use Trophy Points.

There _is_ a value to this, as has been mentioned - it gives a reader some idea as to the "character" of the person whose post they are reading. "Character" isn't the right word, of course, but the User Title is an attempt to convey, e.g., whether a person is a forum regular or a casual user, whether or not they're a certified SFG, etc. And, of course, @Pavel Macek is right, one's user title isn't the most important thing, particularly for those of us who are regulars here, but if there is a way to make our User Title Ladder - what's being referred to here as Forum Levels, more useful, I'm all for that, too. But as you can see, it's not necessarily the simplest thing to configure, because I think each forum needs to find its own balance of what might, in a single phrase, best summarize something for the reader's benefit.

-S-
 

ClaudeR

Triple-Digit Post Count
I'd have to agree that likes received is probably a better measure of quality than posts... especially since "esteemed" and "respected" imply quality

BTW @305pelusa, you have an awesome broad back, make judicious use of it :) I like your thread, and i am certain so does Pavel
 

LukeV

More than 300 posts
I must admit I see a lot of posts that I like but I rarely click "like" (fat fingers on a small button on my iPad screen)
 

dc

More than 300 posts
If you're going to use likes instead of posts then there should be a ratio. Number of likes compared to posts should be considered. Some people have a high number of likes because they have an insane number of posts, they are also esteemed or respected on the forum as they are habitual posters, which is fine, but doesn't necessarily mean they know what they're talking about..... just saying. @305pelusa don't quit the thread, you started it, it's I topic I've considered discussing myself. But didn't quite have the nuggets to bring it up. Not the first time you've expressed an opinion or asked a question I didn't have nuggets for either, so don't take your "bat & ball" & go home, I'm relying on you.
Edit: fixed my speling mistakes before Steve seen it;)
 
Last edited:

305pelusa

Quadruple-Digit Post Count
If you're going to use likes instead of posts then there should be a ratio. Number of likes compared to posts should be considered. Some people have a high number of likes because they have an insane number of posts, they are also esteemed or respected on the forum as they are habitual posters, which is fine, but doesn't necessarily mean they know what they're talking about..... just saying
It's good thinking but there's an issue. Having a ratio means that every time you post, you also have to get a similar (or more) amount of likes based on the ratio. If your posts don't get as many likes, you could actually fall down to a lower tier. Now I personally have no problem with that and most forums have both a like and dislike button. But I don't know if that's something @Steve Freides would want. It doesn't create competition between users, but it does create a strange dynamic.

The ratio also would remodel everything. Note that Steve' ratio is actually somewhat low (5 like for every 10 posts roughly). My ratio is higher (at 9 likes per 10 posts). @Kettlebelephant would have an almost perfect 1-to-1. And you yourself have almost 15 likes for every 10 posts (!). Achieving that ratio does require that your posts have excellent quality. However when you consider Steve has gotten about 5 times more likes than me (and about 20 times more likes than you), I don't buy a system where he could be ranked lower. Especially because Steve is probably the epitome of "esteemed" in this forum. Same issue with @Anna C, who would go drop to a lower tier.

We can do different formulas than take into account a certain percentage of posts and likes. The easiest thing to me still seems to base it on Likes. Creates no competition.

I do hear your concern that there are members who simply post a lot and obtain Likes that way when other members, perhaps with less time, should be higher up because their posts are actually gold. I'm still trying to think about how to tackle this.

@Steve Freides: Is it possible to use a formula? Say Likes/square root(Posts)? That will still hurt those who post a lot in the hopes of getting Likes, but it doesn't hurt the ones who truly post a lot (like you and Anna) who would deserve a good User Title.
 

Steve Freides

Forum Administrator
Staff member
Senior Certified Instructor
@305pelusa, I think the numbers in my particular case may be skewed by the fact that I participated regularly in the old forum, and there are no Likes from that time.

Does anyone know if you post 10 times, and one post gets three likes, if that counts as one or as three? I'm guessing it counts as three.

-S-
 

305pelusa

Quadruple-Digit Post Count
@305pelusa, I think the numbers in my particular case may be skewed by the fact that I participated regularly in the old forum, and there are no Likes from that time.

Does anyone know if you post 10 times, and one post gets three likes, if that counts as one or as three? I'm guessing it counts as three.

-S-
It's three. Just liked a post of yours that had likes already, and your Like count went up.
 

305pelusa

Quadruple-Digit Post Count
@305pelusa, I think the numbers in my particular case may be skewed by the fact that I participated regularly in the old forum, and there are no Likes from that time.
OHHHH whoah that's very interesting. I hadn't even considered that. Any way you can eliminate the posts count gained from posts from the older forum? If you can, then perhaps the ratios might not be as skewed as they seem and it might be worthwhile. It still runs into the issue of dropping a tier but I guess that would only happen if you start posting worse content haha.
 

Steve Freides

Forum Administrator
Staff member
Senior Certified Instructor
I'm chatting with our developer on this subject - managing Likes can be handled several ways, and we're at the "kicking the tires" stage to see what makes the most sense. Excluding the old forum from ratio of posts::likes is one thing, excluding training log forums from likes is another, and there are more. We have to decide if we want to remove the Likes themselves in some cases, or change the way the math is done inside the forum software - lots of things to think about in terms of what both works and does not turn into a maintenance headache for our developer later on.

All the input is appreciated - keep those cards and letters comin'. :)

-S-
 

dc

More than 300 posts
And you yourself have almost 15 likes for every 10 posts (!). Achieving that ratio does require that your posts have excellent quality
. Not really, just realised another glitch basing it on likes. I've got a lot of likes per posts, but I don't often give sage advice. Scored some likes for posting something people thought was funny & scored more as support for telling how I have over come addiction.
 

Steve Freides

Forum Administrator
Staff member
Senior Certified Instructor
There are options out there that allow more than just a Like. I don't know that we need that, but I know it exists, and then I have no idea how it might interact with all the user titles and trophies and the like - but I'll investigate.

-S-
 

Kettlebelephant

Quadruple-Digit Post Count
You also need to account for the subjectivity of Likes.

There are some posts in the forum that simply give wrong advise, yet because the people who liked it didn't know it was wrong, those posts get 5,6,7 or more likes, despite being wrong and/or low quality.
And on the other hand there are some high quality posts, that are only a sentence long and therefore "not that flashy" which only get one or maybe even no like.
I see that with my own posts, sometimes I just make a little joke or post a picture that people think is funny, so they like it and I get 5 or 6 likes out of that little joke, but I wouldn't rate this a "quality post".

I'm not saying this, because I think that only "quality posts" should be liked, but to show that Like doesn't equal high quality and therefore a poster with a lot of likes or a good post/like-ratio doesn't necessarily is someone who's advice you should follow.

That's why I think the ranks shouldn't have names or phrases that imply knowledge or quality to a new user who isn't familiar with the forum.
Just get rid of the ranks entirely.
 
Top Bottom