Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
And just like the thread flagging system, the post rating system does not have a "negative" aspect... posts can't be "voted down." Just like flags, if you don't like a post, don't rate it... simple.

This does not appear to be true. I have seen a couple of posts that seem to have been voted down -- one of which was my own. Has the system been modified after your original explanation?

After running a few tests I have found that I am not able to vote posts down in stars, even if I was the one who awarded them. How then, is it possible for posts to be losing stars? Do the Administration and the Moderators have such a capability?

Originally posted by Nobusuke Tagomi How then, is it possible for posts to be losing stars?

The stars that you see on posts is a cumulative average, if I'm not mistaken.

If two member both voted five stars, your average for those two votes would be five.

However, if two more members for instance only vote one star each for that post, the total would be twelve, divided by the four votes to give you an average of three stars.

edit to add:

I think what SkepticOverlord meant by post are not able to be "voted down", is that there is no way to subtract stars. The result you are seeing is due to "averaging", and not from someone just coming along and stealing one of your stars.

Hope this helped to explain it a little better.

[edit on 5/20/2007 by Mechanic 32]

Originally posted by Mechanic 32


The stars that you see on posts is a cumulative average, if I'm not mistaken.

If two member both voted five stars, your average for those two votes would be five.

I think what SkepticOverlord meant by post are not able to be "voted down", is that there is no way to subtract stars. The result you are seeing is due to "averaging", and not from someone just coming along and stealing one of your stars.

Interesting... Although going by Skeptic Overlord's initial explanation I thought it was the mini-profile that displays an average. It doesn't say anything about there being an average on the stars in the post -- although it would make perfect sense if there was. I skimmed through the thread but I didn't see any further elaboration on this, that's why I asked if the system had been modified since this was written:

Skeptic Overlord
And just like the thread flagging system, the post rating system does not have a "negative" aspect... posts can't be "voted down." Just like flags, if you don't like a post, don't rate it... simple.

And as a companion to this, member mini-profiles now have a star-rating just below the mystery bars that indicate the average of the members post ratings.

Perhaps you are correct, though, that I have misunderstood what was intended. It would certainly make more sense.

I think the way it is, is this:

Posts have there own average. That is what is displayed on each post (assuming it had been rated at least once)

Then out of all of your posts, you have an overall average. That is what you see in your profile.

Of course, I may be wrong as well. But what I stated above seems logical.

Indeed it does seem logical, and you are probably correct. Perhaps Skeptic Overlord's explanation should have read; "...the post rating system does not have a "negative" aspect... posts can't be "voted down" to a 0 rating once a vote has been received, as the stars in each post show the average rating (if the post has been rated several times.)" The initial explanation does not clarify this in any way.

I apologise if you have already explained this in a different post, Skeptic Overlord. I couldn't see it.

Originally posted by Mechanic 32
Posts have there own average.

Yeah, that is right.

Say a person rated a post 5 stars, and then another person rated the same post 1 star. It would show 3 stars (the average). So each post can go up and down star-wise, but it can never go down to 0 stars.

Now computing the average of what Mech32, NT, enjoies05 have said, this is what emerges….

Posts have there own average. That is what is displayed on each post (assuming it had been rated at least once). Then out of all of your posts, you have an overall average. That is what you see in your profile. If two member both voted five stars, your average for those two votes would be five. However, if two more members for instance only vote one star each for that post, the total would be twelve, divided by the four votes to give you an average of three stars. There is no way to subtract stars. The result you are seeing is due to "averaging", and not from someone just coming along and stealing one of your stars. It is the mini-profile that displays an average. It doesn't say anything about there being an average on the stars in the post -- although it would make perfect sense if there was. Member mini-profiles now have a star-rating just below the mystery bars that indicate the average of the members post ratings. Say a person rated a post 5 stars, and then another person rated the same post 1 star. It would show 3 stars (the average). So each post can go up and down star-wise, but it can never go down to 0 stars. Then the average in the mini profile is dependent on the average of the stars in posts which have.........Oh, never mind!!!

Darn! Does anyone have a software program to sort all this out? I thought quantum mechanics equations were far simpler!

That’s it! You guys sort it out. I’m heading to the bar to cool my fried brains. Cheers!

mikesingh I believe you were starting to make some sense to all of the stars. I hope Skeptic Overlord can verify if this is actually correct or not.

The blue stars that are shown are is an average rating of all those who have rated a particluar post. The yellow stars are is an average rating of all of your rated posts. To me that would make sense, and all votes would count.

If Skeptic Overlord meant by "posts can't be voted down", that once a post is rated 5 stars, that no one can rate it lower. If someone rated a post 5 stars and I thought it only deserved 3, then my vote of three stars wouldn't count. The only vote that would count is the person who thought it should have a 5 star rating. That would not be fair.

The only problem I have with this, is how can I tell if I already rated a post or not? I'm sure others besides myself get distracted, and like to revisit previous threads after awhile for various reasons. Maybe there could be a checkmark or a little smiley beside the blue question mark to indicate that you already rated a post.

[edit on 20-5-2007 by Mystery_Lady]

I think you'll get an error message if you try to rate a post more than once. Give it a try and find out, the next time you rate a post.

Yo?!
What's the deal?
I had five stars, and now I only have four.
How did someone snag one of my stars?
Disappointed.

Yep, I took it, and and I'm changing my name to 'Star Eater', so there.

Really, go back on this thread and you'll get the answer.

Oh yeah, well I'm changing my name to Star-Eater-Butt-Kicker so there.


Oh, so the stars are an average huh?

I see.

Um, yeah, so how about those ratings?
Yep...

wu kung, now we cancel each other out. This can't be good. Well, let's just go back to not really caring. We're good at that.

Heh, yeah, what's that old saying?...
Apathy is the better part of valor?

Well wu kung, apathy is what you seem to get to a question sometimes. Look at the thread I started right here about flags and the ranking.

I had one moderator tell me everyone was gone from the forum. And aside from that, nothing. It's a short thread, go read it, and tell me there what you think.

Maybe if you and others read and post there, someone will get the idea that an answer is in order.

Hello,

I have noticed that SOME members just rate the post, not regarding the quality or the information or anything basicly, but just on basis who the author is. So I have noticed, that from yesterday - when I had an averege 4 stars - to today somebody opened a lot of my posts and rated it all with 1 star, so my averege grade is no only 2 stars. Do not get me wrong, I am not a suckers for these stars I just find it childish and immature that certain members would do that, just to make you look less graded, thats all.

Thank You in advance.

Regards,
Souljah

I think there should be a way for you to see which of your posts have been starred. Like a recently starred section or something. Just a suggestion...

Originally posted by Souljah
Hello,

I have noticed that SOME members just rate the post, not regarding the quality or the information or anything basicly, but just on basis who the author is. So I have noticed, that from yesterday - when I had an averege 4 stars - to today somebody opened a lot of my posts and rated it all with 1 star, so my averege grade is no only 2 stars. Do not get me wrong, I am not a suckers for these stars I just find it childish and immature that certain members would do that, just to make you look less graded, thats all.

Thank You in advance.

Regards,
Souljah

1 Star is a Positive Thing

If you have any stars at all, then you are doing just fine.

Originally posted by Mystery_Lady
If Skeptic Overlord meant by "posts can't be voted down", that once a post is rated 5 stars, that no one can rate it lower. If someone rated a post 5 stars and I thought it only deserved 3, then my vote of three stars wouldn't count. The only vote that would count is the person who thought it should have a 5 star rating. That would not be fair.

What he means is that all stars are a positive thing. Your post cannot be kicked down into crap-land, it can only be uplifted into star-land. Yes, a 5 star vote and a 3 star vote combine to make a 4 star vote... but you still recieved stars, and therefore, your post was voted up... not down.

We have no little negative red stars, only positive yellow stars. If you have stars at all, then YAY.

[edit on 5/22/2007 by damajikninja]