ATS 2010 Updates Thread - #(UPDATE Nov. 10)#

page: 62
40
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I noticed that the "new formula" for WATS doesn't seem to be based heavily on thread starters at all, as apparently high flag numbers no longer matter, at least as much as before.

--airspoon
edit on 27-10-2010 by airspoon because: I'll keep that comment to myself for now




posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


Do you have any guesses upon how this new formula is factored?



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


I'm sure that one could figure it out if they cared enough to play around with the numbers. Whatever it is, it isn't formulated for thread-starters, unless it is based off of a thread - flag ratio, though it still doesn't seem right.


--airspoon
edit on 27-10-2010 by airspoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by Misoir
 


I'm sure that one could figure it out if they cared enough to play around with the numbers. Whatever it is, it isn't formulated for thread-starters.


--airspoon


This is what S.O. wrote, it is based on thread starters and flags.


Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Heads-up.

As alluded in my post on the new Karma number, the Way Above Top Secret index ("W") is being readjusted to more heavily-weight flags for thread-starters.

At some point today, your "W" numbers will be revised to reflect the new formula.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Here's me... shaking my head in confusion and just going with the flow...




posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


I read that earlier when I first seen that my WATS had changed. It did not help me very much in determining what the new formula could be.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


I know what he said, as I read it, however the math says something else, at least the math I'm going by. The only way that could be the case, is if it is a thread-flag ratio, though still doesn't seem right.

Nope, not a thread - flag ratio.

--airspoon


edit on 27-10-2010 by airspoon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


I said it before and I'll say it again ... egonomics is complicated.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
reply to post by airspoon
 


I said it before and I'll say it again ... egonomics is complicated.

Now I am totally confused, the good news is that I don't really care.

Second line



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
I'm convinced that in the back rooms there are teams of super mods against lowly mods play a fast game of dueling Karma. I see some new members K fluctuating like an adolescent boys...................GPA.

I suppose that's why mine remains static.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 
I just don't get it either.


Maybe it's the numerical value of the letters in our names multiplied by the stars we didn't receive squared by the ratio of posts to thread success?

Some of ATS' most popular and prolifically polite members are less than 10 on Karma. Just maybe....maybe dammit! zero Karma is the goal?!

Perfect balance.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Top button does not work, Firefox browser here.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I just noticed that my W=28 on ATS; however, if I go to BTS it is 50.

See y'all later, imma go hang out in BTS


EDIT: it just changed on ATS....looks like y'all still have to see me
edit on 27-10-2010 by Aggie Man because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
If I possessed motivation and math skills I would figure out the formula. But alas, I possess neither.

When will The Powers That Be inform us lowly Proles of the new WATS status quo?

EDIT: Did we even get a Karma formula yet?

EDIT #2: Nevermind. Should have waited.
edit on 10/27/2010 by PETROLCOIN because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
I just don't get it either.


It's not real complicated.

Karma is influenced most by a stars-to-post ratio, with a minor influence from flags.

WATS is influenced most by a flag-to-post ratio, with a minor influence from stars and post-count.

Long term members with a high number of well-flagged threads will achieve a high WATS number -- or -- mid-term members with highly-flagged threads will also receive a high WATS number. It reflects a ranking of those who start quality threads (mostly).

Short term members who create replies that earn stars may achieve a high KARMA number -- or -- those long term members who focus more on adding to existing threads and are starred as a result, will also achieve a high KARMA number. It reflects a ranking of those who add quality to existing threads.



Sure, there may be short-lived abuses to stars and flags, but the intent of the system is to aid in painting a larger picture of ATS content. While, on occasion, some individual posts or threads may receive more flags or stars than deserved, on the whole I believe the system works as intended as a means to showcase important topics and hard-working members.
edit on 27-10-2010 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Any exact formulas that can be disclosed or are they way above top secret?

.....

Yes, I'm full of jokes. I'll be here all week.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 
Cheers, that's clearer. One thing I've noticed is that there's no where near the ruckous that kicked off in 08 with the removal of the contribution bars.

Is the media upload area coming back or has it been too fraught with litigation potential via copyright?



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Just noticed I made a spelling mistake on a profile comment but when I tried to edit the mistake away, I got a blank white screen with the words error to the top left hand side..

Not that much of an issue admittedly, but thought you might like to know about it so maybe it can be fixed.
edit on 27-10-2010 by Rising Against because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 



It's all good big guy......


Thanks for the headsup. For second I thought my BAD Karma was catching up with my WATS rating.



posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
HAH!

And here I thought that the W was for warnings, and I somehow have 0.03 warning on me.

This is a prime example of just taking a bit of time to actually RESEARCH things before speaking or writing





new topics
top topics
 
40
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join