...

View Full Version : The formula for the new "Helpful member" award...



WA
10-09-2007, 09:37 AM
Ok, so with the "Thank You" feature up and running for a few weeks now, I think it's time to proceed with the reason why it was added in the first place- for the new "Helpful member" award calculation. For better or for worse, the process is more automated and easier to maintain than the old votes system IMO.

To discourage "gaming", and also, to award not necessarily just the "most" helpful member, but members, here's what I have in mind:

Every 3 months or so, the most helpful member will be calculated using the following formula:

1) First, a month out of the last 3 months will be randomly picked out of.
2) Of that month, the top 3 users with the most thanks will be further picked out.
3) Of the 3, one member will be randomly chosen to win the award.

For the "random" bit, it will be based on some sort of generator that's public, so everyone can see it's truly random. I think this formula helps identify helpful members in a way that numbers alone can't always do, by bringing in the random bit to the table.

What do you guys think? Without any real disagreements we can get going.

felgall
10-09-2007, 10:49 AM
Is there a way to turn the "Thanked x Times" off if we don't want thanks?

WA
10-09-2007, 11:05 AM
Is there a way to turn the "Thanked x Times" off if we don't want thanks?

Unfortunately no, unless you mean globally, for all members.

BarrMan
10-09-2007, 12:47 PM
Great Idea! Thanks for doing this!
I got a suggestion though.
Instead of having a random picker for the helpfull member I think it would be better to let the users vote like a poll from those 3 users which has been the most helpfull member. Because I think using a random script to determine who's the most helpfull won't always have the correct results and I don't think the most helpfull member award should be assigned based to a random script.

Thought about something else for that:
Maybe instead of a regular poll there will be questions about those 3 users like:

Do you think this user should win the award?
Yes
No
Has this user demonstrated knowledge in the subject?
Yes
No
Has this user ever been rude to anyone?
Yes
Explain: [Answer]
No
Why do you think this user should receive the helpfull member tag?
[Answer]
Additional information you would like to add? (*Optional)
[Answer]

[Send results]


This user can be replaced with the user the questions are asked on, Answer is an input, Send results is the final input.

Philip M
10-09-2007, 01:46 PM
In the past job advertisements often stated "canvassing will disqualify". My suggestion is to disqualify people who blatantly ask for rep points, thanks points and helpful member awards. Only insensitive people are comfortable begging.

BarrMan
10-09-2007, 02:02 PM
Also I would like to suggest a "Ban a user for being very rude and attacking another user" button.
Let's say, in this thread for example: http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=125270 I would have probably used it on philip.

_Aerospace_Eng_
10-09-2007, 04:05 PM
Also I would like to suggest a "Ban a user for being very rude and attacking another user" button.
Let's say, in this thread for example: http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=125270 I would have probably used it on philip.
There is a report a post button on the left, its the red/white looking triangle on the left however this is a bit off topic.

I do agree that it shouldn't be random. If that was the case then what exactly was the point of implementing the "thank a user" system anyways?

I agree with #1 but I think the top person of that month should win. It only makes sense. Hypothetically speaking I could have 100+ thankful points and then you pick two others who have about 40 points less than me. Then the "random" thing picks one of those two members. Clearly they weren't as helpful as I was.

BarrMan
10-09-2007, 06:38 PM
There is a report a post button on the left, its the red/white looking triangle on the left however this is a bit off topic.

I do agree that it shouldn't be random. If that was the case then what exactly was the point of implementing the "thank a user" system anyways?

I agree with #1 but I think the top person of that month should win. It only makes sense. Hypothetically speaking I could have 100+ thankful points and then you pick two others who have about 40 points less than me. Then the "random" thing picks one of those two members. Clearly they weren't as helpful as I was.

Thanks. But you do know I didn't really mean to have a 'Ban a user' button. It was just because Philip wanted to disqualify me because he doesn't like me or something. I just used the report button. Hopefully someone will do something about what he did to me.

Fumigator
10-09-2007, 06:49 PM
Is there an option to donate the award to charity if we win it?

And I agree, pandering for thank yous and rep points is silly :p

BarrMan
10-09-2007, 06:52 PM
Ah... Nevermind.

Spookster
10-09-2007, 06:53 PM
Ok, so with the "Thank You" feature up and running for a few weeks now, I think it's time to proceed with the reason why it was added in the first place- for the new "Helpful member" award calculation. For better or for worse, the process is more automated and easier to maintain than the old votes system IMO.

To discourage "gaming", and also, to award not necessarily just the "most" helpful member, but members, here's what I have in mind:

Every 3 months or so, the most helpful member will be calculated using the following formula:

1) First, a month out of the last 3 months will be randomly picked out of.
2) Of that month, the top 3 users with the most thanks will be further picked out.
3) Of the 3, one member will be randomly chosen to win the award.

For the "random" bit, it will be based on some sort of generator that's public, so everyone can see it's truly random. I think this formula helps identify helpful members in a way that numbers alone can't always do, by bringing in the random bit to the table.

What do you guys think? Without any real disagreements we can get going.


How are you going to randomly select _Aerospace_Eng_ each time? :D

abduraooft
10-09-2007, 07:53 PM
How are you going to randomly select _Aerospace_Eng_ each time? :D
You really deserve an award:thumbsup:

rmedek
10-09-2007, 07:58 PM
I think the "thank user" system is just so abused…you run into posts like this one (http://codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=125330) where people are thanked just for posting. It becomes a game of who will post the most times, rather than who will post thoughtful, helpful replies.

I still like the old system, where someone had to be motivated enough to mention a helpful user in another thread. Heck, in my day, we had to walk uphill—in the snow, no less—to be able to nominate someone. None of this sissy rep-pandering and "thank me" nonsense. :thumbsup:

Aradon
10-09-2007, 08:05 PM
I think the "thank user" system is just so abused…you run into posts like this one (http://codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=125330) where people are thanked just for posting. It becomes a game of who will post the most times, rather than who will post thoughtful, helpful replies.

I still like the old system, where someone had to be motivated enough to mention a helpful user in another thread. Heck, in my day, we had to walk uphill—in the snow, no less—to be able to nominate someone. None of this sissy rep-pandering and "thank me" nonsense. :thumbsup:

Truth of the matter is, it doesn't matter what system will be put up. Every system will be abused, rules will be bent, etc.

Just the name of the game. I've long given up trying to compete with the more popular users / forums. :P

felgall
10-09-2007, 09:13 PM
So are you going to turn this silly system off or should I just stop visiting this forum?

On second thoughts - I have added to my signature requesting for people not to thank me. Hopefully that will keep me out of the silly contest to see who can make the most posts and con people into "thanking" them.

Fumigator
10-09-2007, 09:58 PM
Why are those two options the only options? A third would be "ignore the thank yous". :thumbsup:

GJay
10-10-2007, 12:01 AM
I agree with #1 but I think the top person of that month should win. It only makes sense. Hypothetically speaking I could have 100+ thankful points and then you pick two others who have about 40 points less than me. Then the "random" thing picks one of those two members. Clearly they weren't as helpful as I was.

That does assume that you're trying to award the posters who help the most people, rather than providing the most help- I'd argue that being the first to answer 100 really simple problems is far less deserving of recognition than being able to help with a smaller number of more complicated ones. Hypothetically speaking, of course.

The proposed new system doesn't completely change this, but it's a step in the right direction.

WA
10-10-2007, 09:24 AM
To answer some of the concerns, I think the point with the new set up is to not be so serious in picking the most helpful member, just a way to loosely identify them, then among these people, randomly give one person within this group a small encouragement. And before actually awarding the winner, I will do a quick check to see if there's a glaring number of silly "thank you's" given to the member in question that shouldn't be counted. The point is, this is supposed to make the whole thing less serious, more fun, in a way. Someone said this silly system will force them to not post at all on CF- that I don't really understand, since this isn't about penalizing anyone, it's about awarding people in a way that's part achievement based but also part "lotto" based. Now if I'm giving away a house each time to the winner, I can see how that may incite discontentment on the part of people who feel that the system isn't fair or that they should have won, but we're talking about the kind of prize that gets lost in th email and you wouldn't even care that it did.

Keep the suggestions coming, but please take into account what I said above as well.

rmedek
10-10-2007, 09:29 AM
Now if I'm giving away a house each time to the winner, I can see how that may incite discontentment on the part of people who feel that the system isn't fair or that they should have won, but we're talking about the kind of prize that gets lost in th email and you wouldn't even care that it did.

Was I the only one who got a house? Thanks again for that, George. :thumbsup:

Roelf
10-10-2007, 10:22 AM
How are you going to randomly select _Aerospace_Eng_ each time? :D

Just do a weighted random, by using the postcount as a weight factor

Philip M
10-10-2007, 08:30 PM
Part of the problem is that there are some very active and knowledgeable members such as AE and glenngv who realistically are going to win all the time - and deserve to, I hasten to add.

Could the scheme be improved by specifying that no-one can win more than once a year?

Another issue is that the quality of the responses is not measured - 100 replies to simple questions (the sort I can deal with! ;) ) is apparently worth more than 90 answers to hard/complicated ones.

The question of canvassing has not really been addressed - surely those who openly request 'thank you' points ought not to prevail? Or is it a case of every man for himself, and the devil take the hindmost? I sympathise with Stephen (felgall) - but perhaps he is going too far in the opposite direction, although if blatant canvassing is allowed then perhaps I do not want to play either.

felgall
10-10-2007, 11:57 PM
I deliberately went further in the opposite direction with what I said than is perhaps really warranted. Having this contest on the forum probably wont affect my posting here at all unless the quality of the forum deteriorates to the point where it is no longer worth visiting. I can't see that this contest will have any real effect on the forum except to increase the quantity of poorer quality posts from people hoping to be thanked making it harder for people to find the real answer to their questions.

WA
10-11-2007, 12:48 AM
I can understand the concern with the "thank you" feature possibly driving up more replies with this quality if an award is attached to it. I'm not sure how many members are that dedicated to winning a small prize though, especially since part of the selection process is random, and out of anyone's control.


The question of canvassing has not really been addressed - surely those who openly request 'thank you' points ought not to prevail? Or is it a case of every man for himself, and the devil take the hindmost?

If I do move forward with this, canvassing won't be allowed in the member's sig.

vinyl-junkie
10-11-2007, 04:43 AM
If I do move forward with this, canvassing won't be allowed in the member's sig.
I really hope you do this, regardless of how the award is made or calculated.

I like your idea of making the award random from the top 3 in the chosen month. You're right, I think, to take a close look when making the determination of who really is at the top. Like others have said, answering a smaller number of tough questions should hold more weight than answering a whole lot of easy ones. No matter how you choose to give out the award, there will always be some who will cry foul. Still, I think you're on the right track with this.

rmedek
10-11-2007, 06:23 AM
Here's a thought…how about having the mods choose the most helpful member of the month? No canvassing required. That way the winner is more of a standout of the month versus just someone who posts a lot. We would, of course, be totally objective and not be persuaded by "gifts" of any kind…er…

Although having Spookster win every month might get tiring after awhile…

WA
10-11-2007, 09:24 AM
Here's a thought…how about having the mods choose the most helpful member of the month? No canvassing required. That way the winner is more of a standout of the month versus just someone who posts a lot. We would, of course, be totally objective and not be persuaded by "gifts" of any kind…er…

Although having Spookster win every month might get tiring after awhile…

So would the mods be able to elect another mod or not? Either way I can see people screaming foul. hehe

felgall
10-11-2007, 09:26 AM
Sitepoint's member of the month award is selected by forum staff. Not sure exactly who make the selectionn or what criteria they use but everyone is only allowed to win it once and there is no indication of whether anyone is being considered until they announce their monthly winner.

Philip M
10-11-2007, 12:44 PM
Here's a thought…how about having the mods choose the most helpful member of the month? No canvassing required. That way the winner is more of a standout of the month versus just someone who posts a lot. We would, of course, be totally objective and not be persuaded by "gifts" of any kind…er…

Although having Spookster win every month might get tiring after awhile…

A lot better. Cuts out the canvassing! But mods ought not to be eligible! And an individual should not win more than once (or at least once a year).

liorean
10-11-2007, 03:27 PM
But mods ought not to be eligible!Any reason for making mods not eligible? George doesn't pay any of us, our presence here is entirely carved out of our own free time with our own personal motivations. So if a mod happens to be the most helpful member for a while, how does that make it any less fair if that mod gets the award, than if say... aero... gets it, also without being paid and spending all the time he does here on his own volition and on his own free time. Only because mods can affect the selection procedure while other members cannot?

Fumigator
10-11-2007, 06:11 PM
It would be like congress giving itself a raise... but I personally wouldn't mind at all. Mods deserve the prize more just based on the crap mods have to endure imo.

How bout a mod of the month prize? Base it on the number of infractions served up?

Also, CF should partner with a scooter website and the helpful member award should be a scooter.


Either way I can see people screaming foul.

That seems to be inevitable regardless of WHAT you do.

Spookster
10-11-2007, 06:42 PM
George doesn't pay any of us

Oh i'm getting paid alright.

http://www.roflcat.com/images/cats/270916529_3f7b783e6c.jpg (http://www.roflcat.com)

felgall
10-11-2007, 09:46 PM
That seems to be inevitable regardless of WHAT you do.

Not if you don't have an award - then there is nothing to scream foul about.

_Aerospace_Eng_
10-13-2007, 02:49 AM
How exactly do the Rep points work now? In my User CP it says I have 206 but on the forum stats it says I have 75/218

Spookster
10-13-2007, 03:23 AM
How exactly do the Rep points work now? In my User CP it says I have 206 but on the forum stats it says I have 75/218

I have 3. People hate me. :D

Aradon
10-13-2007, 04:30 AM
I have 3. People hate me. :D

Uh oh. He knows!

*runs*

rmedek
10-13-2007, 05:41 AM
Aradon, "hate" is not the same thing as "respect and fear." :D

Philip M
10-13-2007, 10:06 PM
I have 3. People hate me. :D

" Oderint dum metuant "

The translation of the Latin phrase "oderint, dum metuant" into
English is "Let them hate, so long as they fear", and it is believed
be a favorite saying of the emperor Caligula.

Spookster
10-14-2007, 12:04 AM
" Oderint dum metuant "

The translation of the Latin phrase "oderint, dum metuant" into
English is "Let them hate, so long as they fear", and it is believed
be a favorite saying of the emperor Caligula.

Yeah and he was assassinated by his own guards. :eek:

On that note... Guards you are all fired.

Bring me my new robotic henchmen.

marek_mar
10-14-2007, 01:45 AM
Let me program them for you...

WA
10-14-2007, 08:25 AM
Perhaps the best way to do this is using a combination of both the old method and new. Hmmm I think I'm on to something here...

PappaJohn
10-14-2007, 08:16 PM
Maybe something like limit the Reputation to staff access and the Thanks to user access. Then use an average or weighted average formula using Rep & Thanks to determine your top 3.

_Aerospace_Eng_
10-16-2007, 05:40 AM
I like where you are going with this though I don't think 1 time should be the max number of times some should win. Maybe 2 or 3 times and then pick the second place person.

P.S. If I win, I don't want any hugs from dudes...:p

WA
10-16-2007, 05:49 AM
I like where you are going with this though I don't think 1 time should be the max number of times some should win. Maybe 2 or 3 times and then pick the second place person.

P.S. If I win, I don't want any hugs from dudes...:p

I assume you've read and are referring to the rules for the new Helpful Member thread (http://www.codingforums.com/nominate.php)? A winner will only be "benched" for a 1 year period, which may seem long, but then again, there are only 4 winners per year, so I think that's pretty fair/ balanced.

Don't worry, I'll try and get a female CF member to give out the hugs. :D

binaryWeapon
11-11-2007, 06:49 PM
One thing you might consider is the Thanks to Posts ratio. I mean, if someone posts 100 times and is thanked 100 times or even more, they still might not get an award, you know what I mean?

Inigoesdr
11-11-2007, 08:50 PM
So the formula should take into account posts they made that were just comments/not helpful or in reply to an "Active Members" forum post? The point is to reward members who are helpful and offer an incentive to everyone to be helpful; not to reward people for posting.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum