Stars and flags completely redundant?

a reply to: and14263

Yeah I know a couple of mods who have issues with my personal opinions who certainly would not give me applause... for anything!

Not sure if thats the case. Though the same thing too once about certain mods and time later got applauses from them.

purp.

a reply to: and14263

I totally get what you are saying. Here's a lil piece to chew on: the most stars I have ever encountered from a single post is 334, yet there are several members whose average star count per post is well into the several hundred, some close to or exceeding a thousand. That is, some members average almost a thousand stars - many more members averaging several hundred (and because of T&C I am pretty sure I cannot identify a member as an example) - per post. And because the likely probability distribution of stars per post is normal, this makes no sense. I have NEVER seen a single post receive anything close to a thousand stars, what I am missing?

Again, to rehash, many members average 500 - 1000 stars per post, but I have NEVER encountered a single post even eclipsing 400 stars, so something has to give. Given averages are almost uniformly (normally) distributed, the fact in over 6 months as a member I have never seen a single post come close to a thousand stars does more than suggest something is wrong, it proves it so.

This is basic statistics. It is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to average over 334 (the biggest star count I have observed for any given post) stars per post, yet they are literally a dime a dozen. Forgive me for not reading the entire thread, but I am hoping I am not the only person to point this IMPOSSIBILITY out. If given the opportunity to give examples (drop names/handles), it'll take me no more than a few minutes to show there are many upon many members with average star counts in the 500 - 1000 range.

Please someone clear this up.

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

There is a bug that a lot of the older members caught somehow that boosted our star counts into the millions.
I think it is members on or before 2007. Not exactly sure of the date, I just know it happened with a lot of us who have accounts that go back years.

When you see a member with really high star counts, check the date they registered, and that should clear up a lot of the confusion.

a reply to: Darkblade71

Gotcha. Thanks for helping making sense of it. And add another star to your 5+ million

a reply to: and14263

Maybe we should have pink stars for those who bring throwaway 'lolcats' and blue stars for those who bring knowledge and scientific truths?

SO basically you would like to see Above Top Secret separated from below top secret, which is the "off topic" forum now.
That would be the only way I could see being able to separate types of stars on the website. They kind of did that long ago with having ATS and BTS, but it is all integrated now and easier to navigate.

I only rely on flags when it comes to threads I have personally written. It is how I judge my own writing, by allowing others to flag if they so choose. Stars are now useless as I am becoming my own universe with star counts...lol

But the flag system is very helpful to me in both ATS and off topic as it tells me how much my thread was liked or disliked. Now, other peoples threads is a different matter. I flag any thread that draws my attention and I participate in, even if I don't agree, but that is just how I use the flags, and I find them useful.