Originally posted by dogstar23
What do stars "get" you? I really may be missing something, I know there is a lot of functionality I don't know about ATS (for example, what is the
"W" in the stats?) anyhow, maybe there's a good reason besides "weee, look at me, I have a lot of stars!" if so, I'll gladly start using my
power to star more, as appropriate.
I’m indebted to member Sherlock Holmes for figuring out these formulas. As far as I know, ATS management has never been explicit about the scores. I
believe Sherlock may have back engineered the formulas mathematically. I’m not really sure. In any case,
It's ((stars * 15) + (flags + applause) * 10)) / posts. So if you take the following example you get:
7466 stars 3979 posts 524 flags 87 applauses
((7466 stars * 15) + ((524 flags +87 applauses) * 10)) / 3979 posts
(111990 + 6110)/3979
118100 / 3979 = 29.68, rounds to 30
So the K score is 30. Note that the overwhelming variable here is stars, which are multiplied by 15. You get much less for flags (starting threads) or
‘exceptional’ posts that earned applause, both of which are multiplied by ten. Applause, which can earn you 500 points a whack, are counted the
same as a single flag here. So right off the bat flags and applause are worth two-thirds of what stars are. But the whole thing is divided by number
of posts, which means the more posts you have, the lower your Karma Score. If you had 5,000 posts instead of 3979, your Karma Score would be 24. If
you only had 2000 posts your Karma Score would be 59, twice what it is. Therefore, making posts that do not earn stars is to your detriment. It is
better to make one pithy post than two throw-away comments that don’t add to the conversation.
It's (number of posts ÷ 600) + (number of flags ÷ 80) + (number of stars ÷ 170). As an example:
(3979 posts / 600) + (524 flags / 80) + (7466 stars / 170)
6.63 + 6.55 + 43.91 = 57.09, rounds to 57
So this Wats score is 57. Here you see an opposite (and far simpler) sort of formula. Here stars are worth half of what flags are and posts themselves
are worth about an eighth of what flags are. Flags are dominant. Here nearly 4,000 posts earn 6.63 points and a mere 524 flags earn almost as much at
6.55 points. But since there are so many stars, even though they are worth half of what flags are, it still gives a boost. But clearly, flags, earned
for starting threads, is the dominant theme here. Also, in this score posts don’t hurt you because they are added in, not a part of a ratio. In the
previous formula, lowering your post count raised your score. In this formula, lowering your post count lowers your score. There are some problems
with the WATS score. It doesn't really do what it was designed to do and rewards longevity. It will always go up so all you have to do is stick
around. Karma, on the other hand, can go down the more unrewarded posts you make.
No, it's not always "fair." This post will earn me far fewer stars than my first post in this thread, but people were just rewarding my joke. My
stance is that you ought to take these as a very coarse measure of how well you are doing. I currently have a 2:1 ratio between stars and posts. If I
fall below that ratio, then, to me, I'm not contributing as well and probably tossing off posts no one cares about. In other words, I'm wasting my
time. That's a queue to me, not you. If I see someone, like seabag, who has a 5:1 ratio I may a bit more attention to him because his posts are
usually pretty good. If you have a low ratio, particularly a low K score and are bitching about stars not meaning anything, then all that means to me
is that I need not pay attention to you.
Your mileage may vary.