Quality Index - Determining users' content quality

[admin]

Being discussed in forum senate

-----------------------
I have previously announced a quality bar to improve posts quality:
https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=319457.0

but i notice further action is required, thus this quality index.
the objective of this forum is to discuss crypto, increase and share knowledge about crypto, not find every possible non crypto subject just to increase post count.

thus decided to try to see if we can improve the situation.

It is normal to have a mixture of different quality posts, but when most of your posts belong to one type, this will grant you one of these badges:

-	.	Low quality posts	.	Ok quality posts	.	Good quality posts	.	Great quality posts	.	-
When?	.	Non crypto related topics	.	General crypto topics & News	.	Technical Updates from chains & Detailed analysis	.	In depth technical & Coding	.	status
user1	.	20	.	10	.	5	.	5	.	Neutral
user2	.	20	.	3	.	1	.	0	.
user3	.	5	.	10	.	10	.	10	.
user4	.	5	.	10	.	10	.	20	.
-------	-	--------------	-	--------------	-	--------------	-	--------------	-	--------------
Admin	.	-	.	-	.	-	.	-	.	-

This index will be updated every now and then, by me, global mods and president / vice president
Each time the last 20-50 posts will be taken in consideration

--- Rules (to be developed), so far:
1- if low quality more than all the others > low Q badge (unless 25% or more is in-depth & technical )
2- we can scrap the low quality badge

[hugeblack]

It is normal to have a mixture of different quality posts, but when most of your posts belong to one type, this will grant you one of these badges:

This will lead to the opposite effect of increasing technical spam and having less discussions on General crypto topics.


As if I created all posts in Non crypto related topics, this does not mean that the quality of posts is low or spam.


In short, classifying the quality of posts based on the boards will be bad, it is better to rely on decentralized things like +Karma, quality bar, and voting.

[examplens]

I ask if the thread is open for discussion because it seems to be a very debatable matter.

This will lead to the opposite effect of increasing technical spam and having less discussions on General crypto topics.


As if I created all posts in Non crypto related topics, this does not mean that the quality of posts is low or spam.


In short, classifying the quality of posts based on the boards will be bad, it is better to rely on decentralized things like +Karma, quality bar, and voting.

+1 by my side

There is only one technical board, all the rest are non-technical discussions, and there is not much activity there.

The method of implementation itself is also a rather bad idea because it is centralized, it will be based on some personal opinions. At the same time, an additional burden for the administration, I assume that you will have to go through all the posts of all active members during the month. That's thousands of posts.
I am very sure that there are much more important tasks to improve the forum that could be devoted to time

Probably is okay to add the expert badge to someone who has proven technical knowledge, but tagging someone because he doesn't know how to sign a message on an address is a pretty bad thing.

Wouldn't it be better to improve the already existing karma system? If it were visible which post received more karma (+ or -) points, it would be obvious to everyone what the quality of the post or the user who wrote it is.

[admin]

I ask if the thread is open for discussion because it seems to be a very debatable matter.

This will lead to the opposite effect of increasing technical spam and having less discussions on General crypto topics.


As if I created all posts in Non crypto related topics, this does not mean that the quality of posts is low or spam.


In short, classifying the quality of posts based on the boards will be bad, it is better to rely on decentralized things like +Karma, quality bar, and voting.

+1 by my side

There is only one technical board, all the rest are non-technical discussions, and there is not much activity there.

The method of implementation itself is also a rather bad idea because it is centralized, it will be based on some personal opinions. At the same time, an additional burden for the administration, I assume that you will have to go through all the posts of all active members during the month. That's thousands of posts.
I am very sure that there are much more important tasks to improve the forum that could be devoted to time

Probably is okay to add the expert badge to someone who has proven technical knowledge, but tagging someone because he doesn't know how to sign a message on an address is a pretty bad thing.

Wouldn't it be better to improve the already existing karma system? If it were visible which post received more karma (+ or -) points, it would be obvious to everyone what the quality of the post or the user who wrote it is.

this is exactly my point,
most users on this forum jump on each opportunity to discuss anything .... except crypto
our forum is flooded with low quality content because of that
if more than half your posts are about something other than crypto > it really indicates you are reaching for the low hanging fruits
yeah sure, let's discuss a forum policy, it's much easier than learning and discussing what mainnet was launched, or what regulation or license was done concerning crypto ..
when i created the shit post badge i wanted to give it to many users, but reconsidered as that would penalise them signature wise.

[dragononcrypto]

Don't think is a good idea what so ever to be it bluntly similar to what others have suggested.  A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.

Can we otherwise just launch the senate election already now details have been finalised and discuss forum policy over there with elected reps?

[admin]

Don't think is a good idea what so ever to be it bluntly similar to what others have suggested.  A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.

Can we otherwise just launch the senate election already now details have been finalised and discuss forum policy over there with elected reps?

sure, freemind gave the go ?

also, this is not a ranking system, it is a simple observation of how users contribute

[bitmover]

A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.

What about if the badges mentioned by the admin, could be added according to Karma count earned in the specific Cryptocurrency board?

Or even disable +Karma to posts which are not crypto related.

Imo, more transparency to Karma should be top priority. Knowing which posts received Karma, and who gave karma to that posts, would fix most abuses and highlight best posts.

Karma is a already a good way to measure post quality.

[dragononcrypto]

A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.

What about if the badges mentioned by the admin, could be added according to Karma count earned in the specific Cryptocurrency board?

Yeh something like this makes more sense I was thinking. For example (post count / karma = rating) as some sort of algo.

It would save a lot of mod work rating users that otherwise isn't going to happen in reality.

Karma is a already a good way to measure post quality.

Agreed, this is what I've always thought. It should be up to the community to decide which posts they believe have value using karma, no-one else. There was a time when the forum was better curated using +/- karma and those with low quality posts would have very little or otherwise negative karma, but there are many more users issuing karma now since teleportation so times have changed. I otherwise recommended we update LQP post to include "posts with low quality or value" as opposed to simply "short shitty replies", so that low quality posts in general are eligible for -karma. The forums concept of shitposting seems outdated now that quality has generally improved, so we should be raising the bar here.

[Findingnemo]

I am in for anything that will help the increase of quality in the discussion but this system looks too centralized and it will take a hell lot of work for admin (you) and mods or anyone who will be analysing the quality of the posts since everything has to be checked manually.

Like others pointed out Karma system is good enough to deal with the low quality posts but since it's not required to rank up then I guess something has to be in place to keep everything in check.

Let's see how the system works...

[un_rank]

this is exactly my point,
most users on this forum jump on each opportunity to discuss anything .... except crypto
our forum is flooded with low quality content because of that
if more than half your posts are about something other than crypto > it really indicates you are reaching for the low hanging fruits

This imo falls under stricter moderation rather than a badge, if there is zero tolerance for low quality content and they get deleted often, people will stop making such content or it will reduce. Reducing the benefits of low quality posts, will also help as there is no motivation to prop up post count.

We may have to wait and see how this quality index gets implemented, but my first impression is skeptical.

- Jay -

[Freemind]

~snip~

I think incentivizing technical conversations with Karma or additional tokens (or a combination of both) would be more stimulating than "flagging" users with those badges. I know they are different ways of pursuing the same goal, but I think we can say that it is somewhat aggressive. In any case, before having a better formed opinion, I would like to know what more users think and read their opinions.

sure, freemind gave the go ?

Tomorrow I will have a post ready that I will send to dragononcrypto to make sure everything is correct, if so I will let you know before publishing it.

[Mia Chloe]

I think incentivizing technical conversations with Karma or additional tokens (or a combination of both) would be more stimulating than "flagging" users with those badges. I know they are different ways of pursuing the same goal, but I think we can say that it is somewhat aggressive. In any case, before having a better formed opinion, I would like to know what more users think and read their opinions.

You have quite a nice point here. From my experience so far on forums like this , technical board are always the best and have the most contributions most of the time. Anyone here that frequently visits the technical board will definitely agree to the fact s that technical post are very engaging and actually helps members slot in different ways and this includes both the person probably asking the technical question and those contributing too.

With the current karma system in my opinion, I really don't think that the technical board members are getting enough appreciations for their contributions to the forum. Sometimes you can't really tell if someone is an active quality posters in boards like this since very few persons have those extra badges.

[philipma1957]

A centralised ranking system is simply not a good idea at all and it would only drive quality users away so I suggest a speedy rollback of this proposal. As examplens said, it'd be better just to improve current karma system, even if complicated it'd be less work in the long-term.

What about if the badges mentioned by the admin, could be added according to Karma count earned in the specific Cryptocurrency board?

Or even disable +Karma to posts which are not crypto related.

Imo, more transparency to Karma should be top priority. Knowing which posts received Karma, and who gave karma to that posts, would fix most abuses and highlight best posts.

Karma is a already a good way to measure post quality.

Karma from who is fine. I HAVE NO NEED to know who gave me karma up or karma down.

I really do want to know what posts gets an up or a down.

I have around +117 Karma.  But maybe I am plus 200 and I have 83 negs. Don't know but want to know.

As for posting to get paid finding any way to make a post I am not that person.  But I do have a real problem about good tech posts, I mine and I build rigs to mine. At the moment mining sucks and the interest In mining has mostly vanished.

[KingsDen]

To me, this is not a very great idea. If this is implemented, expect spammers to find their way to this stage "In depth technical & Coding". Meanwhile, why do we have coding to be a prerequisite for a quality post in a cryptocurrency forum?

Admin has alot of jobs to do, I'll advice you ignore this task, and campaign managers can indirectly solve this for you. When campaign managers exempt some boards in their campaign, the participants will naturally readjust.

Besides, if you don't want discussion in generic boards, delete the boards and all will be fine.

[dkbit98]

This index will be updated every now and then, by me, global mods and president / vice president
Each time the last 20-50 posts will be taken in consideration

It is a bad idea to give so much power to admin and moderators, and I don't see how this can improve quality of the posts in any way.
If you want to reduce number of posts unrelated with crypto than you should delete and unite some boards and topics in Further Discussions.
I am against this proposal, and I think this would only create more confusion in forum.