awilsondc wrote:I think this is what needs to happen. Either we go with the like/dislike system, or someone comes up with a new algorithm for the 0-10 system. The reason you don't get more 5-9 votes is that even though the person is trying to say hey, your work is pretty good but not perfect, the page score gets lowered. Lowering a page score is seen as a negative thing even though you were trying to say something positive. The new algorithm should improve a score if if the vote is 6-10 (by varying degrees) and lower the score if the vote is 1-5 (by varying degrees).
Josh Lewis wrote:I'm pretty sure there is a way to deal with this. Make 5/10 neutral, less than 5/10 negative, and everything above 5/10 positive.
I want to say that I hear what many of you desire to see with the voting system. But someone needs to provide an algorithm or an equation for calculating the total score where a 6-10 vote ALWAYS improves the score and 1-5 vote ALWAYS lowers the score REGARDLESS of what the current score is...if that's even possible. I actually have a masters degree in Math, so I'm burned out on that sort of thinking
But I'd be happy to implement any algorithm or equation someone comes up with and test it out on the new server SP will be migrating to.
For argument's sake, suppose we do come up with some sort of calculation that would function as people desire with a voting scale from 1 to 3 or 1 to 5 or 1 to 10. Would people really use the entire scale? I doubt it since no one did with the transition to SPv2 (if they had, we wouldn't be having this discussion). And what do we do with the 4.1 million votes in the system that are 10 if we transition to a new system. Assuming people actually did use the scale as intended, voting the full range from 1 to 10, all of the pages that have so many historical votes of 10 would have a significantly skewed score if the votes were pulled into the new system. Do you delete all of the historical votes and start over? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me...
Bruno wrote:Personally, I would almost never vote "Dislike"
AlbertoRampini wrote:PERSONALLY I VOTE ONLY WHEN I LIKE, WHEN I DON'T LIKE I RATHER PREFER TO GIVE NO VOTES
I think that is the way over 96% of the people vote with the current system (10 if they like it, abstain if they don't). Perhaps all we need is a like button. And if one thinks the page needs work, then they should submit a comment detailing what they think needs to be added/corrected and abstain from "liking" the page until the person improves it to the point where you think it is worth "liking."
Then we could do away with score completely and just sort pages by the number of likes instead of a complex score calculation. That's probably not too far off from the results generated by the extremely complicated equation currently implemented for calculating scores right now since nearly all of the votes are 10. In which case, is any change warranted? Perhaps everyone can just keep voting 10 if they like a page and not voting if they don't
Josh Lewis wrote:In some sense TrekNature pulled this off. In this example someone voted 1/2 on my photo. This did not bring down the score.
I can't see any votes or scores on that page. Can you point me to exactly where those things are? Maybe I need to have an account and be logged in to see them?...Just created an account and still can't see the score or votes...
Anyway, without knowing how their algorithm works, you can't assume that they have something along the lines of what you're proposing. They may have implemented something similar to what SP currently does where outlying votes (votes too far away from the standard deviation) are thrown out or they have some other way of calculating the score.
Scott wrote:Most people only vote 10/10 on everything and everyone is afraid to give a "bad" vote on a page that needs work. It shouldn't be this way. Bad pages should be voted on, hopefully fixed by the maintainer (at which time the vote is raised), and if still poor quality after a long period of time, deleted.
Right! That's they way the SPv2 voting system was intended to work. But the problem (as I understand it, at least) is that almost no one is comfortable voting anything other than a 10. The current voting system would work perfectly if people actually voted on a scale from 1 to 10, but they don't. Since almost no one (less than 3% of voters) is voting less than 10, I don't see the point in having anything other than a like button.
I'm fairly certain I can come up with a way to calculate some sort of "score" based on the number of likes a page has in comparison to other pages. And factor in the power of the user who "likes" the page to make more a powerful user's "like" count for more than newly created, less powerful users (as is the case right now). I think I'll set up such a system on the new server and see if it yields reasonable results.
Bob Sihler wrote:Many of us are used to the 10-point academic scale, so when we think of 8, we think of 80%, a B or B-, for example. But I just went and test-voted 8 on an image with no votes (and then canceled the vote), and the score was 63.52%, what many of us think of as a D or below average. I think the voting system would have worked much better had votes corresponded to the 10-point scale and page scores been calculated as averages.
The 10-point academic scale thinking probably is the root of the caused failure (if you want to call it that. I'd argue that it still works in some capacity) of the current SP voting system. People believe that a page score of 50% is horrible or failing, when in reality it should be representative of an average (on order with C) page. 40% is just below average (on order with C-), 60% would be above average (on order with a C+). Of course, that's assuming that if one took the 4.3 million votes in the system and averaged them, they'd average out to be about a 5. But the average of them is 9.88 with a standard deviation of only 0.7!
Bob Sihler wrote:I realize the point of weighting vote power based on power points was a means to combat avatars and trolls, but it also had the effect of producing what many of us are accustomed to thinking are bad scores when we voted numbers that we normally would expect to produce good scores.
Matt, it isn't so much that a 7 lowers the score but that it lowers it far out of proportion to how voting 10 raises it.
I just went through the voting code and reacquainted myself with the algorithm. The weighting of the vote power doesn't really have a significant effect on the value you see for the score. If you were Dow (the user with the most power points in the system at 5623 and 2600+ points more than you), and voted an 8 on that image, the score would have been 63.31% instead of your 63.52%. When I vote an 8 on an image with no votes, it generates a score of 66.37% and I have only 89 power points. When the system first came online, a vote of 8 would have yielded vastly different results; probably yielding a score closer to 80% or 90%. PAY CLOSE ATTENTION HERE BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT MOST PEOPLE AREN'T UNDERSTANDING:
But now that the average vote in the system is 9.88 and the standard deviation is only 0.7, a vote of 8 looks pretty bad in comparison, so a lower score is generated. If the average vote in the system were a 5 and the standard deviation were 2 (which I'd guess to be somewhat accurate if people voted fairly), a vote of 8 would yield a score of 92.27%.
Most people's voting weight is very, very similar, especially once they get 10 or more power points. The "lower-than-expected" score is due to the way people are expecting the scores to be calculated. Scores were intended to spread evenly from 0% to near 100% and to be used primarily for the purpose of ranking pages (not making people feel bad). A score of 50% isn't a "bad" score. It just indicates that the page is average and could be improved. In hindsight, it would have been better to base the "score" on some other sort of scale. Maybe have called something like "Power Score" and spread it from 0 to 1000 or something would have prevented this from happening. But maybe not...
Anyway, as I mentioned above, I think I'll try to implement a "like" button, change all 10 votes to "like", drop the others and come up with some sort of equation to calculate score based on vote weight and number of "likes."