What would happen if top-rated was brought back?

[ska]

Top Rated = Multi-Accounting and Sniping en mass

I'm all for the graph and also .5 ratings, taking them away was a mistake IMO.
I also think that it frustrates the voter more than the receiver. I'd much rather rate a map 3.5 if it was deserving rather than voting 3 or 4 depending on my current mood. I think that may also give a fairer, or more accurate summation of a particular map's quality.

1) Title search
2) .5 ratings/graph
3) user number on profile or date of join.

[Nexx]

Top Rated = Multi-Accounting and Sniping en mass.

I have never seen such a protectionist community. "Let's prevent the public from finding maps rated 5/5 so that the small portion of the public that would snipe it don't snipe it." That's such a ridiculous policy! How come you guys don't see that?

Also, I wanted to make a quick reply to reply to this:

I wish you would've been around back when Nmaps.net was getting remade. Everyone had complaints and no one had solutions. I stepped up, offered solutions, and willingly worked hand-in-hand with arachnid to get things done.

arachnid is busy again now, so even if you've got an amazing solution, it's likely not going to get implemented soon.

I kinda wish people were happier from all the work we (mostly he) did. Instead, they complained before and they complain now. People had their time to fix NUMA and most used the time to come up with fresh new complaints to volley.

I was there, and that's why I can say that I think you're being a bit unfair in this description. You're talking as though the community discussed or voted on important issues or something like that, and none of that happened. There was lots of talk about new NUMA before it came out, but it was mostly the visual aspect, as I recall. To me, it seemed more like the senior members got together and solidified their own ideas on the way NUMA should be and that was that. When people didn't like the result (legitimately), the senior members got mad and said to get used to it because it wasn't changing again anytime soon. To set the record straight, nobody is or was dissing anybody else's hard work and precious time put into the site, they are/were just questioning the path taken. I mean, literally almost every site that allows submission of specific user-made content has a top-rated section or similar. Some sites make it kinda of subtle, like DeviantArt. But the usefulness of such a feature is just so blatantly obvious.

I just wanted to respond to that part for the moment, but doing so gave me an idea. Would you say that DeviantArt's most popular of all time section is misled? That it does a disservice to the site? What about other sites? If you're saying that NUMA's top-rated fails on the semantic level, is the because the concept of a top-rated anything fails on a semantic level?

[origami_alligator]

Avarin hasn't responded by PM to me yet but I figured I post my suggestion here with a mathematical statement.

Basically what my proposed idea does is push maps with more votes lower down the Top Rated page. It only slightly penalizes maps for having lower rating average. Here's the mathematical function:

x = number of votes cast
x >or= 5 (x is greater than or equal to 5)
x/5 = number of votes to be averaged across
a = average rating
a >or= 4 (a is greater than or equal to 4)
a/(x/5) = map average

So let's assume that some hypothetical map has 6 votes with an average rating of 4.3.
4.3/(6/5) = 4.3/1.2 = 3.58
This number is designated to the map. If it garners more votes, the number may change, thus putting it higher or lower (though almost always lower) on the Top Rated page. Let's assume the map receives a 5, thus changing the map average to 4.4.
4.4/(7/5) = 4.4/ = 3.14

These numbers would be given to the map for Top Rated purposes only. It's almost like the float/sink method, except they almost always sink, and would be a rare case where they float. This kind of method would create a Top Rated page that changes maps on the front page almost 2 or 3 times a day. Let's see how the hypothetical map above would be placed in relation to AfternoonDragonStep04. I'm going to assume AfternoonDragon has an average rating of about 4.789 and last I checked it had 1077 votes.

4.789/(1077/5) = 4.789/215.4 = .022

The lower the number, the lower on the list it is.
I haven't seen any downsides to this method. It sure does mean a lot of coding, but it also ensures that maps that don't have the highest average stay at the top of the list. In fact, Top Rated would be more about how many rates it has more so than how high the average rating is.

I think it's a fine idea and I would hope others think so too.

[blue_tetris]

I wish you would've been around back when Nmaps.net was getting remade. Everyone had complaints and no one had solutions. I stepped up, offered solutions, and willingly worked hand-in-hand with arachnid to get things done.

arachnid is busy again now, so even if you've got an amazing solution, it's likely not going to get implemented soon.

I kinda wish people were happier from all the work we (mostly he) did. Instead, they complained before and they complain now. People had their time to fix NUMA and most used the time to come up with fresh new complaints to volley.

I was there, and that's why I can say that I think you're being a bit unfair in this description. You're talking as though the community discussed or voted on important issues or something like that, and none of that happened. There was lots of talk about new NUMA before it came out, but it was mostly the visual aspect, as I recall. To me, it seemed more like the senior members got together and solidified their own ideas on the way NUMA should be and that was that.

It all slips back to some populist ethic. Ample time and attention was given to all the different ideas. We really did wait for a lot of input from a lot of people and we tried to figure out what was the best among them. No matter what gets done, people are going to dislike it and people are going to think they could've done a better job.

It doesn't occur to people that the "senior members" are also pretty damn active around here. Nothing makes me more upset than the accusation that we get things done because of our position not our passion. I refuse to accept that. We do an awful lot around here.

The design process for the new NUMA was highly up for discussion, but it took place during a brief period. arachnid was on for a short while one night saying he had the scant opportunity to make some changes, so I tried as best as I could to reflect the opinions of the community onto NUMA. If you think I have some ulterior motive around here than what's best for the community, I'd be glad to hear it and act upon it in the future. All opinions are to be heard.

Just needed to get that in there because I hear this concept of seniority and how it excuses everyone from the responsibility of being around and helping out.



About DeviantArt, I don't go there. I couldn't remark. But I imagine "the best images of all time" are not properly reflected by a ratings system, considering how many images are on the site.



@Southpaw: Your math is crazy. The more votes something gets beyond 5, the lower its rating? Until its rating gets down to 3.9? Then it pops back up from 0.27 to 3.99? It also favors earlier votes over later votes, because every later vote (even the good ones) would just put the rating through a multiplier instead of increasing the rating on a fair scale. Unless they could get it down to 3.99 of course! Then it is excluded from the sinking system and pops back up to 3.99 from whatever it was at! The best thing you could do for a Top Rate map is snipe it! Woo!

It wouldn't be tough to code because it's just number crunching, but it just doesn't work. Also, it holds too many values and those extra processes for every rating added to the system would strain the bandwidth.

[Geti]

id still like to be able to find a pile of good maps without doing an author search for "shortshift" or "PALEMOON" or "blue_tetris" or "yahoozy". if top rated just spewed out random 5 rated maps (and had a playable/unplayable search like the old one) that would be acceptable for me. cause maps just don't get 5s without being good really. i suppose there are exceptions, but you get around that by rating it appropriately and eventually they go away.

graph?

[Rikaninja]

I don't mind it. Though I wasn't around when they had top-rated around. And I do actually like the idea South Paw thought of but people will try o bad you can't telepathically talk to each other in this world ;}

[epigone]

Me, I'm all for the top-rated coming back, but there are tons of maps now with a perfect 5 rating, and I just wondered which you think would get knocked off the top first and which one would eventually take the top spot.
Discuss.

To answer the question quite directly: the world will asplode.

[Superpok]

I think featured is a pretty good comprimse, but i kinda wish there was something bigger than it. the dronies are cool, but they aren't realy synced with numa.

Blue_Tetris: why would there be user inflation, can't you just have an e-mail check thing where they have to verify by e-mail?

SouthPaw: didn't quite get B_T's logic, but it seemed pretty soudn

New Numa: its here, its not changing, move on

[Rose]

I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I actually like the way hot maps works. The only thing I think should be changed is that graph idea should be implemented, assuming there's not too much coding involved.

[Superpok]

if i'm correct, but the graph has been implemented, its those little bars in your profile

[Rose]

if i'm correct, but the graph has been implemented, its those little bars in your profile

No I meant the graph idea that was suggested earlier in this thread. Look at Geti's post; quoting it isn't working.

[Geti]

[Superpok]

ah, i see. sorry. yeah, that would be cool, but the one we have now is still pretty functional