All about MilPoints
- Thread starter Mike Bobbitt
- Start date
- Status
George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 223
- Points
- 710
GAP said:
You can go to the "Information" Tab at the top of the screen and a dropdown menu will show you an option "My MilPoint History" where you can view your MilPoint History as to how many points you are earning. It also records your "+/-" points such as negative points for DELETED posts, or awards or deductions from other members, noting who awarded/deducted you points and why.
- Reaction score
- 349
- Points
- 1,410
Moe... Misleading has now been added to the list, thanks!
GAP, bot the assessor and assessee are automatically sent an e-mail from the site when you rate another user. The format is pretty basic, but it has the details of the assessment in it. Neither party can see the other's e-mail address, but it's clear who assessed who.
GAP, bot the assessor and assessee are automatically sent an e-mail from the site when you rate another user. The format is pretty basic, but it has the details of the assessment in it. Neither party can see the other's e-mail address, but it's clear who assessed who.
- Reaction score
- 10,704
- Points
- 1,160
Thanks Mike, looks like a good improvement!
The old system didn't work because it was easy to abuse. If I didn't like you I could just keep dinging you points and you would never now who it's from, quality control.
For the system to work people need to be accountable. We have that system here where if I don't like what you're saying then I can reduce some points but you'll know it's from me. That works.
What I was saying doesn't work is the fact that
1. You're MP's indicate how much you post and how long you're on line
2. They don't represent the quality of you're posts.
When someone starts racking up 10'000 points for being 'on line' does it really punish someone (for lack of a better word) if they loose 10 20 or 50 points. I think upping the point lost to 100/-100 will have a noticeable effect but again generating points (basically) automatically in my opinion detracts from that.
I know it's a work in progress though, just brain storming here.
[While I'm at it I think it's great that members of the forum can (continually) offer feedback and the mods take it as constructive criticism and not just wave their hand at it- thanks guys (and girls).]
Here is my ideal set up for the points system on message forums. (Again just brain storming)
Do away with an actual point amount, when you click on someones name to rate the quality of their post it's either a good point you're giving them or a bad one.
There is a sort of 1 to 10 scale under your name. If X amount of people have given you good 'varrots' then you might have 3 green dots under your name.
If you are consistently making good posts and more people approve of your posts then the XXX amount of good varots you got reflects in the little bar or indicator. Where I have 3 green dots because I'm relatively on ball, you'll have 6 or 7 indicating you've made serious contributions to the forum.
(As it stands now I can have 100 posts and 20000 points, again it's not indicating quality but quantity)
I like this system because it's a peer evaluation system. If I ask a question and someone with 1 green dot gives me a smart ass reply I'm going to think ya whatever noob. But if someone with 7 dots replies I'm going to realize he or she has the approval of most of the board and is well respected by his or her peers.
Likewise you can give someone negative varrots. If someone just starts here and makes some dumb posts and a number of people ding them for it then all of a sudden they have 2 red dots under their name. Their posts are obviously rubbing people the wrong way. They keep making bad posts and now their sitting at 5 red dots. Now it's obvious their trolling. Their reputation is poor and no one is really interested in their posts.
If they manage to smarten up and start making helpful contributions then members will give them positive points and now their out of the red and slowly sliding into the green.
It's completely peer assessment.
Also if someone who is red due to negative points from trolling tries to give me a negative point it just comes out as neutral. (0 value) Their comment gets recorded BUT since their in the red, they don't cause the person to drop. (this stops people from just trying to be spiteful).
This rewards someone for making quality posts and punishes people for making bad ones.
The reward/punishment is in terms of forum reputation. The points purely reflect the quality of posts made by the member.
The old system didn't work because it was easy to abuse. If I didn't like you I could just keep dinging you points and you would never now who it's from, quality control.
For the system to work people need to be accountable. We have that system here where if I don't like what you're saying then I can reduce some points but you'll know it's from me. That works.
What I was saying doesn't work is the fact that
1. You're MP's indicate how much you post and how long you're on line
2. They don't represent the quality of you're posts.
When someone starts racking up 10'000 points for being 'on line' does it really punish someone (for lack of a better word) if they loose 10 20 or 50 points. I think upping the point lost to 100/-100 will have a noticeable effect but again generating points (basically) automatically in my opinion detracts from that.
I know it's a work in progress though, just brain storming here.
[While I'm at it I think it's great that members of the forum can (continually) offer feedback and the mods take it as constructive criticism and not just wave their hand at it- thanks guys (and girls).]
Here is my ideal set up for the points system on message forums. (Again just brain storming)
Do away with an actual point amount, when you click on someones name to rate the quality of their post it's either a good point you're giving them or a bad one.
There is a sort of 1 to 10 scale under your name. If X amount of people have given you good 'varrots' then you might have 3 green dots under your name.
If you are consistently making good posts and more people approve of your posts then the XXX amount of good varots you got reflects in the little bar or indicator. Where I have 3 green dots because I'm relatively on ball, you'll have 6 or 7 indicating you've made serious contributions to the forum.
(As it stands now I can have 100 posts and 20000 points, again it's not indicating quality but quantity)
I like this system because it's a peer evaluation system. If I ask a question and someone with 1 green dot gives me a smart ass reply I'm going to think ya whatever noob. But if someone with 7 dots replies I'm going to realize he or she has the approval of most of the board and is well respected by his or her peers.
Likewise you can give someone negative varrots. If someone just starts here and makes some dumb posts and a number of people ding them for it then all of a sudden they have 2 red dots under their name. Their posts are obviously rubbing people the wrong way. They keep making bad posts and now their sitting at 5 red dots. Now it's obvious their trolling. Their reputation is poor and no one is really interested in their posts.
If they manage to smarten up and start making helpful contributions then members will give them positive points and now their out of the red and slowly sliding into the green.
It's completely peer assessment.
Also if someone who is red due to negative points from trolling tries to give me a negative point it just comes out as neutral. (0 value) Their comment gets recorded BUT since their in the red, they don't cause the person to drop. (this stops people from just trying to be spiteful).
This rewards someone for making quality posts and punishes people for making bad ones.
The reward/punishment is in terms of forum reputation. The points purely reflect the quality of posts made by the member.
- Reaction score
- 349
- Points
- 1,410
Nice system, I like it... Maybe one implementation of that would be to retain the score we have today, but have an indicator below your score that is based solely on the feedback of others (as you suggested above). That way someone with 10,000 MP could still have 2 red dots (or equivalent), and someone with 100 points could in theory have many green dots. Having both a high score and a good rating means you've been here a while and made solid contributions.
Anyway, I like the premise and I'll think about how we might implement it... as always, discussion from the membersip is welcome!
Cheers
Mike
Anyway, I like the premise and I'll think about how we might implement it... as always, discussion from the membersip is welcome!
Cheers
Mike
- Reaction score
- 1,028
- Points
- 1,240
MilPoints (MPs) have been around for a year now. So far there has been one contest using them.
After a year, how is everyone finding the system? Are there enough checks and balances to make MPs useful? Are most people ignoring MPs?
After a year, how is everyone finding the system? Are there enough checks and balances to make MPs useful? Are most people ignoring MPs?
- Reaction score
- 349
- Points
- 1,410
kratz, having looked through the logs, I can say that a handful of people are using the system. However that handful seems to be growing daily, so we're moving in the right direction. People are definitely using it as an active/immediate feedback system. Is it working? Hard to say, really. I'm sure the positive reinforcement is, but you never know how willing people will be to criticism.
Might be time for another MilPoints contest...
I *do* have bigger plans for the system, but other things (like moving!) have made my to do list even longer than normal. I will get to these things though!
Might be time for another MilPoints contest...
I *do* have bigger plans for the system, but other things (like moving!) have made my to do list even longer than normal. I will get to these things though!
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
I find it leads to curiosity; like when Im reading a post by a new member whose points read in the negatives, Im curious as to what they said to get them there. It doesnt seem to make much difference for those with numerous or high post counts, but certainly brings to attention new members who tend to be argumentative, or who say unpopular things...
Likely not the purpose of the system, but thats how it is working...
Likely not the purpose of the system, but thats how it is working...
- Reaction score
- 349
- Points
- 1,410
As a very simple first step, I've added a tooltip which shows how many points a user has "earned" in the last week. This total only includes MilPoints awarded or deducted by other users, not points earned by online time, posts, etc.
To see it in action, simply hover over a users MilPoints total. If a tooltip appears, they have been rated this week; if it doesn't, they haven't drawn enough attention to themselves.
For a good example of how this works, hover over Eye In The Sky's total here:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/88294/post-873042.html#msg873042
Cheers
Mike
To see it in action, simply hover over a users MilPoints total. If a tooltip appears, they have been rated this week; if it doesn't, they haven't drawn enough attention to themselves.
For a good example of how this works, hover over Eye In The Sky's total here:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/88294/post-873042.html#msg873042
Cheers
Mike
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Trying out the last feature you mentioned, I noticed this line in my points list:
Congratulations! You were Earner #4 for 2009-08-30!
Im not sure what I did - what did I earn?
Congratulations! You were Earner #4 for 2009-08-30!
Im not sure what I did - what did I earn?
- Reaction score
- 8,129
- Points
- 1,360
:dileas:.....15 more points.... :dileas:
- Reaction score
- 349
- Points
- 1,410
Greymatters, you earned the 4th most MilPoints on August 30th, and got a little bonus as a result.
The top 5 earners each day get a small boost for being particularly active on the site that day.
The top 5 earners each day get a small boost for being particularly active on the site that day.
- Reaction score
- 2,918
- Points
- 940
In your civie email, you get something like this:GAP said:
(Bruce can afford the hit.....as a... teaching point, ya, that's it ;D )
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,790
- Points
- 1,160
hahahahahahahahahaha!
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Mike Bobbitt said:Greymatters, you earned the 4th most MilPoints on August 30th, and got a little bonus as a result.
The top 5 earners each day get a small boost for being particularly active on the site that day.
Ah, I see... wouldn't $cash$ rewards work better as an incentive? ;D
- Reaction score
- 349
- Points
- 1,410
Heheh, they would indeed. Maybe I'll give MipPoints a cash value... 10,000,000 per penny seems like it fits the budget.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Tell you what, I'll sponsor your reward system - The first person to get to 10,000,000 MilPoints, I'll volunteer a cash $10.00 reward 
Mind you, that will only be for the first person to do it - wouldn't want to pay out to a stampede of contenders all getting 10,000,000 MilPoints at once...
Mind you, that will only be for the first person to do it - wouldn't want to pay out to a stampede of contenders all getting 10,000,000 MilPoints at once...
- Reaction score
- 8,129
- Points
- 1,360
Greymatters said:Tell you what, I'll sponsor your reward system - The first person to get to 10,000,000 MilPoints, I'll volunteer a cash $10.00 reward
Mind you, that will only be for the first person to do it - wouldn't want to pay out to a stampede of contenders all getting 10,000,000 MilPoints at once...
Make sure you send Mike his cheque now...... >
- Reaction score
- 8,129
- Points
- 1,360
Journeyman said:
Hmmmmmm, well I now know that I can GIVE 10,000,000 points.............. :-*
- Status
Similar threads
