Interpret the numbers and give them the weight that you will but I think you may have mis-characterized a couple of your evaluations.
With the exception of K they all have a cumulative effect, i.e., the more active one is and the more they produce raises those numbers as they
contribute with the exception of K which seems to be the relation of stars and flags to the number of posts, so K is more of a ATS reader-given
K might suggest how well that member's contribution is received by others, so a high K would likely indicate that other ATS members rate this member
well and tend to think their contributions are valuable.
F, flags, would be the rating to indicate the person creates many threads and how well those threads are received and considered valuable to other
members, but these are cumulative and should be considered against the number of threads one actually starts. Their actual thread count can be found
on their profile page along with some other data that does not appear with their posts.
From the profile page you can find the number of Applause ATS staff has awarded the member and might indicate how well his contributions are
considered to add to the overall quality of ATS. These too should perhaps be guaged against the overall number of contributions the member has made
over time. ATS points may be all over the board in relation to the number of the persons contributions though they do increase as contributions are
made, however, the points can fluctuate and the member can earn a seemingly disproportionate number of ATS points to their overall post/flag count.
Many members have negative ATS points where points are deducted for warnings received. Some members may actually prefer reading posts fom those with
negative points as their comments could tend to be more sharp and cutting.
The W rating largely keeps in-step with the number of posts but other factors like flags, applause, and stars can add to that number. To give weight
to the W number is should be examined against the member's post count to see if it actually is indicating more than just their overall post count.
Then you are left to decide, if you wish to evaluate a member by his numbers as you suggest you do, if you choose quantity over quality or some other
factors such as popularity or inflammatory qualities of their contributions. Some of these points are just raw count while others are highly
subjective. If one goes by numbers alone they may overlook a new member that really has something valuable they are contributing. High numbers can
indicate a seasoned ATS veteran but overlook new talent. And a high K may only indicate the member has touched on some volatile issues and said
something popular on some occasions and may be more indicative of the popularity of the issues that member has spoken to. The numbers are a bit of a
In the end, those numbers may really be more important to the member himself so they could guage how their contributions are being received ay ATS
staff and members as it sometimes can be difficult to be objective about one's own contributions.
I have fun with the numbers and I am conscious of them but they may give false impressions if taken out of their overall context.
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
I like the numbers below our username now... it took a long time to really get used to them but I actually glance at them now!
basically how I see it is like this:
P = posts written
F = flags
S = stars
We all know what those mean
A low "W" means you don't write many of your own threads
A high "W" means you do start a lot of your own threads
A high "K" means the comments you leave get a lot of stars
A low "K" means the comments you leave don't make much impact.
I like the numbers because I can get a feel for someone's ATS member style and maybe decide which threads to focus on if I'm pressed for time. For
example, If someone posts a UFO video and their numbers are something like W: 50, and K: 0.3.... with 800 posts, and 6 flags... I may not pay that
much attention to it.
On the contrary if someone says something like "my close friend says the Marines are going into Libya tonight - no proof, but hey." I'll look at the
stats... if they've been on ATS a long time, have a high "K" and lots of flags I'll be more likely to beleive them!
edit on 21-4-2011 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)