Buz Groshong wrote:
Alpinist wrote:Hooboy. Are we really opening this can of worms again? The voting system has been discussed ad nauseum in the past. I was a big proponent of changing it when SP2 was first launched but it may be too late now since all of the current votes are based on a binary scale (10 or nothing).
The formula that should have been implemented is based on a weighted average 10 point scale.
((V1*P1)+(V2*P2)+(V3*P3)) / (P1+P2+P3) = S
V1, V2, V3 = Votes from 3 different people
P1, P2, P3 = Power ranking of the 3 people
S = the object's Score
In this example, only 3 people voted. Simply extend the formula for any number of people.
This would yield the results that people are expecting to see. Scores would be based on a 10 point grading scale similar to the way schools grade. If an object had a score of 88 and you voted 9, the score would always increase slightly based on your Power Ranking. Similarly, if you voted 8 on that object, the Score would always decrease. There are no quirky exceptions. The voting system would always work as expected.
The weighted average method gives members with a higher Power Ranking a greater ability to influence the Score.
One problem with that scoring method is that it doesn't take into consideration those who didn't vote. If people look at the object and don't vote because they don't want to be seen voting low, then their nonvote needs to be taken into account, which the current system seems to do to some extent. If voting is secret, then there would be no need to take nonvoting into account and your scoring method would work quite well.
Funny, I was thinking just the opposite. If I were to change the above formula at all, it would be to reward
objects that get more traffic.
I don't think an object's score should be penalized because someone chooses (or is too lazy) not to vote. A lot of members never vote on anything. If an object is getting a lot of traffic, then I believe it has more value than an object that doesn't get any attention.
If we did that though, some objects would have a Score greater than 100. Thus I think it would be best to stick with the formula above and ignore page hits. Or better yet, use the page hits as a way to sort objects with the same Score. In other words, an object with a Score of 100 and 2000 page hits would rank higher than an object with a Score of 100 and 1999 page hits for the purposes of "sorting" objects in search results or page listings.