Status based on Karma instead

Tmeels

Tmeels

Active member
I was just thinking since we switched to the karma system largely in part to keep kids from posting useless stuff just to bump their post count in order to "gain respect." Why not change that little status thing that's like "ridiculous" or "no life" to coincide with Karma. Like "really cool kid" haha. Figure its the next logical step.
 
That has actually kind of always been the plan... not specifically that maybe, but we've always wanted to link the karma system into all kinds of things. We really wanted to work on it before we made the site function heavily on Karma though, and I don't think we're quite there yet.

Its improved about a billion percent since the launch, but there's still more tweaks we need to make to it in order so that the system truly repreasents who is a "Good" NS member.

We'll get there... then link a bunch of shit to it and it'll be awesome!

 
Sure people give out karma for good contributing to the site in positive ways but its really just a popularity contest.
 
No its not... Karma is measured from many sources. There's many different metrics from all kinds of crazy places around the site.

And Nomen - Yes it is subjective, but the idea is that we're trying to build that in as well. So if there's people that don't like some, it woudl be weighted so that if more than 50% of people DO like them, then its a site-wide decision.

We'll see how it all pans out in the end... until then keep working Karma, and we'll keep monitoring how its running. I think one more round of tweaks and we'll be there.

 
bishop youre a great dude and have a lot of good ideas that improve the site but i dont think this is one of them. i gotta say i really dont think karma's going to ever be anywhere near perfect, or close enough to make it reasonable to have other things relying on it
 
Yeah, I agree. I don't think it should be based on a the content uploaded, such as pictures anymore. I mean, someone who has a bunch of sales, or uploads a ton of random facebook pictures, will tower over someone in karma.
 
I like the Karma system for a few simple reasons, and none of them include me using it as a source to judge someone's personality. What I like about it is that it helps a lot with buying/selling/trading stuff on here. I can look at someone's feedback and karma and it helps determine 1) a first impression as to whether or not they my be legit enough to send money to and 2) whether or not enough people on the site know about the person well enough to vouch for them in any way. Also, if someone says D-bag things all the time, they probably have really low karma relative to their post count, and it is a heads up as to whether or not you want to deal with them.

Obviously not 100% reliable, but it's the only thing we have to use here without making NS into ebay.
 
From what I can gather, Karma seems to be an indicator of the QUANTITY of contribution, not necessarily QUALITY.

I think those people that post more pictures and videos will always have higher karma than those that contribute quality posts, which i don't necessarily think is the best indicator of 'good' or 'bad' (if thats what the object of Karma is)

Obviously there are other contributors such as reviews, blogs etc - but overall, pictures and video seem to take up a fairly significant weighting, irrespective of the content
 
yeah, definitely agreed. i have a friend with about the same karma as me, around 3000 or so, not very high, but he has like a 3 something "what other people rate you" thing, with a ton of pictures.
in my opinion, pictures and videos shouldn't be as big of a chunk
 
your contributing to the site with them i think you should get something for pics and vids. maybe make karma more based on ratings and views. it might already be but maybe use that more than just quantity.

this is really confusing but it makes sense in my head hopefully that did.
 
no offense but eheath is a perfect example of this. hahaha a shitload of people hate heath (note: i am not one of them) yet he still has a shitload of karma lol
 
Yeah see this is the exact final error in the system that I was talking about. Currently it calculates both quantity and quality, plus takes seriously into account what others give you. I think its weighted too heavily towards quantity currently, and with a few adjustments we can really start to make it only about quality. We just don't only want to measure what people rate each other, because thats such a small metric and can be so biased.

Don't think that Karma was my idea though, this was a feature we were BEGGED to add by the community for years and years and years. Everyone hated post count so much they wanted a different system to be rated by.... there's other sites that use similar rating styles, and when you can get it right the possibilities are endless.

I know in my heart there will be some way to figure out how to measure what is a "good" NS member... or at least get much closer than we are. Right now I feel like we're about 55% of the way there to giving a true rating on someone with Karma, but I don't want to do any mass implementation until its more like 90%.

Bottom line for me, its not like it particularly hurts to have the Karma rating there an relatively harmless... and we're not going to link it into anything more until you guys feel that its an accurate representation of what we want it to be.

And hey, at least nobody bitches about post count anymore right?

 
very true, definitely a good thing plus it reduces the amount of spam/shit posts in the forums
 
Well, considering he's dropped over 30 something thousand in the past few months, I'd say its reacting accordingly :) For the record I am usually not a fan of what eheath says...

Anyways, I find myself disagreeing with some of this discussion. (Using my karma as an example), it goes up when I make, say, 2-3 good, informative posts in Gear Talk or Site Discussion that help members moreso than when I make 10-20 bogus posts, like bumps or whatever.

I do believe that the karma system needs to be based more on "real" contributions; blogs, cults, good posts, rather than pics and vids and overall posts, which seem to lump everyone together and there is no separation of the good and the bad.

If you want a perfect example of a member who would "benefit" incredibly off the QUALITY idea, it would be Silence (not saying he's doing it for his benefit, just because I like him). As far as I know, he doesn't post much media and doesn't have a blog. However, the posts in the forums he makes are perfect. His karma should be top dog and its not right now, probably because of this.

Obviously there are kinks in the system, but I like it - I really do. I feel that its a decently accurate reflection of a member and their contributions. Obviously someone with 100 karma could be just as helpful as a person with 100,000 karma, but that's just another variable - chances are that person is new on NS. Anyways, I do like the system and I think Bishop is doing (or is going to do) a good job working out the kinks. Keep it up man!
 
proof that karma ratings are a completely bullshit way to rank members.



71. Trennon





65. WB



60. CampofChampions

39. A.Stevens

16. ParkCity

17. *Rage-Films*

3. Line_Skis

all of those members don't really do anything other then post team or park updates, or occasionally a promotional post in the forums. yet they still all manage to be on the top 100 list.

more proof:

69. Jacob_W

the guy hates the site these days, made a big post on why he was leaving really is he the 69th best member of this site?





how about this:

82. a.beezy (10) (97114)

I just pulled this account off the top rated list, a reported 10/10 on the member rating and almost 100k in karma points. I was interested, so I went to her account and gave her a karma of 5, figured, her karma over all dropped to below 85k. What the fuck? a 15k drop just from one rating? This surprised me so just to see what happened I rated her a zero (not permanently, went back to a 5) and holy shit her karma almost drops another 15k, down to around 73K. Since one persons rating is having so much effect on her karma it is obvious that there is little else effecting it. So my question is, should some one be included in the 100 top members, if there is very little effecting their karma? Should there not be some more requirements?

and here is where I will not be making a lot of friends, but I think it should be noted:





55.eastAR5 (4.2483) (124852)

This kid screws another member over, who it should be noted helped him out, yet he still has 124852 karma points? ya he has photos like this one:

1225253007-657526-249x232-9868king.gif


but I think screwing another member over would qualify as getting an immediate boot from the top rated list; wouldn't you? What if yeti made the list?

And what about post whores who have been banned more then once? can they really be in the list of the top 100 members? well yes apparently they can:





70. skiierman (6.6145) (108398)

And finally the most outstanding reason why the karma system is bullshit is:



13. nopoles$ (9.013) (240826)

Everyone knows Paul should be numero uno. by a long shot.

 
Oh, i definitely don't want my post to come across like I could benefit from it..i'm not concerned about my karma level haha - 500 or 1000000 wouldn't bother me.

In my situation, I'll generally only get a week on the snow each year, and when I do, honestly any photos or videos i took wouldn't be worth putting up here anyway compared to everything else.

I may start a blog or something if my life decides to get interesting, but I wouldn't be doing it so i could get more karma haha
 
Hey Cobra... I think that if a member say has 100,000 karma and karma rates another member, it will go up wayyyy up or down more than say a 1,000 karma member rating someone.
I have not tested this theory, but just a guess.
 
i'm not a fan of the karma system, seems like more noobs rate you low than people rate you high for good things. i've stopped caring about it but if it ends up influencing more than just a number next to your name it should be worked on so it's not all about angry noobs and uploading pictures
 
it actually seems the more i post the lower my karma gets lol.
i dunno why i actually see my posts (for the majority) to be helpful and moving in a positive direction...so i do agree it is, in part, a popularity contest.
w.e i really couldnt care less what my karma is. i know that sometimes i can be 'a jerk' but everyone can...
 
don't hate on annaBeezyyy. Shes been a longtime contributor (member since 2004), has tons of sick pictures (featured in NS articles) and she totally rips. Theres plenty of people on that top 100 list that shouldn't be though. It seems like the Industry people get a huge boost.
 
For some reason I am not choosing to post on Jwenz...anyways

I think the karma system shows what members are good contributors to the site. I mean yes there are exceptions and "favorites" which doesn't seem right. I mean WB just does park updates. Okay thats a contribution but there is no reason that should boost you so much to make you top rated where there are 100s of kids out there that contribute way more that effect much more people that are more deserving. For some reason I dont think the people representing the mountains should be able to be top rated. I mean we all know they contribute based on their mountain. But what do they do for the people not in their regions. For example me. WB is high on the list. He only is contributing to part of the world. Where as you look at other members (not looking at list now) who contribute to the site so everyone benefits. The karma system is overal good, but there are definitely flaws, as there will be with any instated system. My 2 cents (even know it costs more than 2 cents to put those in...side note, ha)
 
I think the member rating is bullshit.
If I see someone make a really really good post I go and give them some Karma (maybe 6/10 or 7/10)
Next thing I know there Karma Level dropped, because my rating is below the average NS member's rating.
I think it should go up if i "add" Karma. and it should go down if I lower Karma (again).

For example:

somebody has a 20000 Karma Rating.
I vote them the first time (saw ONE good post) -> 7/10
The overall Karma rating drops to 19000 although i rated him up on my personal scale (because i liked his post)

Just my 2 cents

 
any time ive touched someone's karma its just been to put it at 10. i wouldnt bother touching it to make it anything less (less than 10 and im not even sure it would raise their karma) and ive never lowered someones karma, id just feel childish
 
In the meantime, we're all really just arguing about our e-lives and our e-status... Karma, posts, they really shouldn't matter. I learned to skim the forums for quality a long time ago, and posts/karma have no relevance. It's usually the icon and the name that catch my eye.
 
ya thats tru i tend to just skim for the icons that i know are legit/i can get quality info/have an intelligent tech discussion with....not like...'what boots are the best?' ' get spks!' that frustrates me to no end.
but i realized who the quality posters were a long time ago
 
i think karma is bullshit. we should only rate people after doing a sales transaction to let people know if they suck or not. otherwise who cares how "helpful" (more like popular) other members are.
 
or we could just say fuck it to the ENTIRE post/karma system. How about post count and karma not even being on the original post itself. if you are an active member of this site/forums (mostly), you know who's legit, you know whose name stands out (not so much more after name changes started) and whos icon is who and what they stand for. If you really gave a shit about this site, all this information would be hidden in the profile, so people, if they actually gave a shit about a person would have to find out a little bit more about the person before they bring down their karma.

its definitely true that a mob of noobs can easily bring down a members karma, or boost a newbs karma to dizzying heights (gheeto-steeze), with the quick click of a mouse. So instead of a badge of honor next to our posts, can't it just be hidden, and if you really need to know a person's legitness, you learn it for yourself and not with the assistance of others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top