# Member rating system?



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Ok guys, this issue was brought up in another thread. And there has been a bit of interest from several people about it
I has been suggested that we implement a rating system so people who are newer members in the forum have an idea of who some of the more active and/or respected members are.
Concerns have been mainly over abuse of the system and the possibility out people posting negative feedback/rating out of vengeance, or retaliation, which of course would feed more of the same.
These are serious and valid concerns, especially so if this can't be contained in one forum (imagine if the system, to run here, would also have to run in ALL forums and sub-forums.)
I am looking to see the level of interest in a system like this, for or against.
I will be letting the admins and other mods know of this thread's existence. You might not see them posting, but they will know about it.
I do see both sides, the plusses and negatives, but this is more about what the forum wants than what I want. As such, I'll only be posting factual things about how I understand the system works in other areas.
*Please *do stay on topic here.

Are you for or against such a system, and why?


NOTE: I am not promising anything here. Just wanted to see what the level of interest/demand for such a feature is. The more factual and accurate information here the better.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

I think we would need more specific information on this prior to giving an opinion. I would advise caution here as these types of systems can become very political if not set up properly.


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

I used to be a mod on a computer building forum. We had a rating system for members like you described. It was an early edition of vBulletin and we enjoyed it once the kinks were worked out. This was 2005ish-2009ish.

If you wanted to give another member a rating, you clicked on an icon next to their name in the specific thread. You would have to explain why you wanted to rate that member and describe the situation of how you were helped or not helped. If the member didn't take the time to write a couple paragraphs...most of the time it was disapproved. Having members write in detail was a forcing function to keep people honest. As a mod...if you ever got confused to the rating request you could check the thread. As a mod, you have a notification panel and the ratings for your section were listed. You would have to read through and approve or disapprove the rating. It took some extra time and effort by the members and the mods. We really liked it in the end!

The problem with that system would be the amount of people on AT. You would be flooded with requests daily. We had about 50,000 members with about 500-2000 daily users. 

There is a lot of immaturity here on AT. That would make it tough also.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

EPLC said:


> I think we would need more specific information on this prior to giving an opinion. I would advise caution here as these types of systems can become very political if not set up properly.


I agree.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

I really don't know. I can see where a system like this can go south very quickly if someone has a grudge to bear.... It just takes one or two to cause a negative domino effect.


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

Just allow positive ratings...no negative ones. That would cut the work load to a fraction.

Make clear and precise rules for ratings.


----------



## 6xsteelers (Sep 6, 2009)

EPLC said:


> I think we would need more specific information on this prior to giving an opinion. I would advise caution here as these types of systems can become very political if not set up properly.


Agreed. My opinion of your "more *active* and/or respected members" is kind of misleading. The fact that someone has 10,000+ posts and have only been a member since say 2012 only tells me that they have nothing better to do but sit in front of there computer. For other people like myself who have been a member since 2009 and been hunting since 1981 but with only 2000+ posts might not be considered the "more active and/or respected members". The fact that someone is more active does not automatically mean they are respected. Far too many pissing matches start because one member does not care what the another member has to say if he only has say 200 posts, even though that individual may be 55 yrs their senior. Unless I`ve got it all wrong and that has nothing to do with how the system would work.


----------



## TheScOuT (May 9, 2011)

6xsteelers said:


> Agreed. My opinion of your "more *active* and/or respected members" is kind of misleading. The fact that someone has 10,000+ posts and have only been a member since say 2012 only tells me that they have nothing better to do but sit in front of there computer. For other people like myself who have been a member since 2009 and been hunting since 1981 but with only 2000+ posts might not be considered the "more active and/or respected members". The fact that someone is more active does not automatically mean they are respected. Far too many pissing matches start because one member does not care what the another member has to say if he only has say 200 posts, even though that individual may be 55 yrs their senior. Unless I`ve got it all wrong and that has nothing to do with how the system would work.


Post count has nothing to do with the rating system. We had members with less than 500 posts but 100+ positive ratings. members respected those members because you know they just send and receive information. Actually members with a low post count/high rating were some of the most respected. They did nothing but just assisted other members.


----------



## Davik (Apr 16, 2003)

No thank you...a system like this would force me to delete my account.


----------



## Blue X (Dec 22, 2007)

You have to view archery talk post like eating ham. 

Eat the ham and leave the bone. If it helps u keep it and if it don't leave it on the plate. 

We talk about archery like its a serious event in our lives but it's just a game. Don't get addicted to the point that it consumes ur life because the end will ruin ur game and ur life and Ull have neither. Almost every member has value we can either learn what to do or what not to do in life as well as archery. If u get so up in the game that u miss the stress relief that a good hobby like archery has to offer, them u have truly lost. 

Eat the ham and leave the bone. Take nothing personal, Click the red x and keep on living and shooting. 

Blue X


----------



## WhitBri (Jan 30, 2007)

Yeah I believe this type of system would be useless after awhile. Some on here I think have knowledge but come across wrong and have a bad following. While others I believe know less but have a cult following on here


----------



## bucco921 (Jan 2, 2012)

No desire to revisit high school popularity contests....

If you stick around here long enough it's really pretty simple to see who the blow hards are and see who always brings good info to the table regardless of post count.

^^That applies to all the sub-forums I spend time in on here.


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

Mahly said:


> Ok guys, this issue was brought up in another thread. And there has been a bit of interest from several people about it
> I has been suggested that we implement a rating system so people who are newer members in the forum have an idea of who some of the more active and/or respected members are.


In my opinion, it would take the same amount of time to research the knowledgable posters in the two or three 200+ post threads as it would to read enough other threads to find the posters with the favorable ratings.



> *Please *do stay on topic here.


This statement should be the theme for every response to the OP, myself included. There could be a bunch negative ratings for rabbit trails, obtuse posts and conversations inside of threads reminiscing about the old days. Then, the mod would be really busy being judge and jury for rebuttal PMs. Then, this forum would lose good contributors and traffic in general. 



> Are you for or against such a system, and why?


Snowest has a rating system that allows "Thanks" for useful posts and keeps track of the amount of thanks for the member. If this is all the farther it goes, I am in favor of a feedback system. 

If the rating system includes both negative and positive ratings, I am not in favor of it. There is minimal moderation of this forum as I see it and requiring more moderation would be a need unfulfilled and posters with ruffled feathers. With the passion level that most of us have for the sport, it would make for a bunch of unnecessary unhappiness for those unable to shrug off negative feedback.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

I too agree that a system like this could go badly quickly. I also think it is really a non issue. This sub-forum has more of a "click" atmosphere than what I believe it was intended to have. There are a select amount of members that feel the need to run this sub-forum and it has discouraged many of the others to participate. With that said, a rating system in my eyes, would be insufficient and unnecessary. The "top" members of the sub-forum have made it clear who they are and what they represent. And should anyone not know of this or participate in another facility, they make it known on their own. 

I know this will probably get some flack. So be it. But this has been my opinion for some time, and with an open invitation to speak on the subject, I felt it appropriate to share at this point in time.


----------



## Joe Schnur (Mar 22, 2012)

Not for me who decides who can speak author actively and who is unqualified. I got a fair amount of the attacks but then again I am who I am I earned the right to an opinion and can back it up. But with my ?low? Number of posts who decides. I think like the personal attacks that drive folks array it invites abuse . I am interested in keeping an open mind though


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

A system like that, would be members giving each other feedback... But with more restrictions.


----------



## ILOVE3D (Feb 4, 2009)

Blue X said:


> You have to view archery talk post like eating ham.
> 
> Eat the ham and leave the bone. If it helps u keep it and if it don't leave it on the plate.
> 
> ...


X2 on this suggestion. Exactly how we should go about our business and I appreciate all the suggestions here.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

System as in; Likes or Thanks or something I'm not understanding?
Rick noted Snowest. Martin has Likes, Thanks and keeps track of them under the person's, name and links the Post and links reply liked or thanked for. Quick access is nice. At one time Martin had a Dislike button. It was removed as in one "Oh chit!" doesn't wipe out a pile of "Atta Boys."


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

so, on an "open forum", where one is free to give "opined" and anecdotal replies and comments to various questions, you want to assign a value to the quality of the replies ?.


----------



## MikeR (Apr 2, 2004)

I think Blue x, hit the nail on the head. It's a game, enjoy the hobby and the social aspect. Participation is the cake, perfecting your own game is the frosting. This has been my experience during 40 years of shooting. It doesn't take long to decide who is giving advice that will work for you.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

You asked for a "for" or "against" and why.

Simply, against. Why? Just because a member may think a particular post/topic contains good info doesn't make it so. 

Thanks.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

No ! its a free country, so what`s next for a rating you would have to send a picture in of you with your bow, so if your hair,beard,weight,height,age or brand of bow you could be now banned from archery talk. Read my lips U.S.A. is a FREE Country to speak as is archery talk ! my family, my friends ,many people on archery talk, many died,many come home crippled that protected the U.S.A. for freedom and that also was freedom of speech !


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

I'm against a rating system. There are too many members who are too petty to make a rating system useful.

IMO, if you want something that distinguishes the more helpful members, a "thank you" system would be much better. They have one on TradTalk that seems to work well.

Allen


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

For what it was meant for, Inter/Advan doesn't have a whole bunch of interest, activity as to new people. We have more of a gab session going on than anything.

Seems most of us are older, been there, done that and reply from that. I don't personally know anyone in Inter/Advan. I might agree with ron, Lazarus, M7790K one time and not the next time. I don't know of any one in here as their ability as in actual competing. I found out a long time ago that someone shooting Nationals events doesn't mean a thing. By the looks of scores they shoot National events just because they are National events (prestige?) because the vast majority finish to the bottom half virtually all the time, most being amateurs. Even then, I know Pros that don't place and still they shoot Nationals. In either case if you have the money, fine. The ASA web site is pretty easy to access scores from way back. Might take a few minutes of looking, but won't take long to see what I noted. You'll find me there once. You won't see me there again. Nationals are for someone else, not me. Time spent away from home, eight hours to shoot 40 targets. I wished I never went. Unlike reported in another Thread, I didn't incur much cost, shared expenses, and actually went home with archery products worth about 3 times more than I spent. I got lucky.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

:thumbs_up Agreed.


SonnyThomas said:


> For what it was meant for, Inter/Advan doesn't have a whole bunch of interest, activity as to new people. We have more of a gab session going on than anything.
> 
> Seems most of us are older, been there, done that and reply from that. I don't personally know anyone in Inter/Advan. I might agree with ron, Lazarus, M7790K one time and not the next time. I don't know of any one in here as their ability as in actual competing. I found out a long time ago that someone shooting Nationals events doesn't mean a thing. By the looks of scores they shoot National events just because they are National events (prestige?) because the vast majority finish to the bottom half virtually all the time, most being amateurs. Even then, I know Pros that don't place and still they shoot Nationals. In either case if you have the money, fine. The ASA web site is pretty easy to access scores from way back. Might take a few minutes of looking, but won't take long to see what I noted. You'll find me there once. You won't see me there again. Nationals are for someone else, not me. Time spent away from home, eight hours to shoot 40 targets. I wished I never went. Unlike reported in another Thread, I didn't incur much cost, shared expenses, and actually went home with archery products worth about 3 times more than I spent. I got lucky.


----------



## Bees (Jan 28, 2003)

computer's are able to measure the amount of subconscious level activity that is happening during piano playing. they are finding out no two people will play the same notes identical. each one has a unique subconscious signature for the activity, so much so, that the way they play the notes can be their password that they cannot divulge to anyone because they don't consciously know what it is.

With that in mind.
All information presented buy anyone about archery is incomplete, because there are things happening on a subconscious level during the activity that the archer is totally unaware of. 
I think the better archers have better subconscious control of their muscles than struggling archers.
no one can comment on what is happening on the subconscious level because you don't know about it. 
A good archer cannot tell you exactly why their arrows always find the X and a struggling archer can't tell you exactly why their arrow's don't. 
Both can only comment on what they think is happening. 

this creates a problem because everyone thinks that what is happening for them, happens the same for everyone, but it doesn't.
so instead of understanding that things are different in each human being, they want to argue about things that they perceive are the same in all. 

so all one can do is read the information and decide for themselves by themselves if this information might pertain to them.
Just like I decide what information might help me and what won't. I would say 98% of the information present here doesn't help me at all.
but that doesn't make it bad information, it just means it doesn't work for me.

I don't see how a rating system would help in anyway. 
against it.


----------



## bfisher (Nov 30, 2002)

TheScOuT said:


> Just allow positive ratings...no negative ones. That would cut the work load to a fraction.
> 
> Make clear and precise rules for ratings.


This could be a viable option. In other words, if you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Much like feedback...I see no value in a member rating system. If you want to know about members- do your homework and read their posts....then make an opinion--YOUR opinion.

Think of it as if it were "like" on facebook...it has no real value. Just because someone else "likes" someone/something doesn't mean you will.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I love the way archery talk is set up currently and for me it couldn't be any better, there is so much to be learned from the discussions here and we do a good job of going back over common subjects over and over even though they have been discussed many times.

Do we need to rate each other, probably not because after you have been here a while you learn what a guy believes in. I suppose that a rating system would allow a new member to seek out advice but if you become a new member and start asking questions you will hear from the main guys pretty quick anyway.

At the end of the day I am pretty sure that a guy can come here with a open mind and get help with form and mental approaches and shooting techniques right now that are pretty stinking solid with or without a rating system.


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

I understand the "mission' of some sort of rating for the benefit of new members with questions. the problem is that it will quickly turn into a circus of political popularity replies, with people saying things to boost their ratings instead of saying the realistic content, whether factual or not. who's to do the rating ?,.... who's qualified to do the rating,...... what makes him/them qualified. how do rate a person who says , "personal choice", on just about every question, some do and for all practical purposes, they are right, or "factual" every single time...so they get higher ratings, than say, a guy that tries to explain stuff and actually inform people with technical information , but stays out of certain areas he knows he's a little weak about ?......his comments would less distributed, but far more effective. what do you base the evaluation on ?.
leave it the way it is. it's not real hard to pick out the guys that know what they are talking about, as it is.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

RON W. for what it`s worth right on !


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Back in the 60's Mondo the mechanic was a bad mechanic... he just replaced things (at your cost) until the problem went away. My grandfather was not mechanically minded and as a result Mondo was the expert. This cost my grandfather much $$$ for many unnecessary repairs. Human ego being what it is promotes "experts" simply because someone knows more than you do about a certain topic. I predict that the Mondo's of Archery Talk will get very high marks from those less knowledgeable.


----------



## Joe Schnur (Mar 22, 2012)

I have noticed that rarely do we all agree as much as on this topic that is why we live in this forum where we pretty much know each other it is a buyer beware world. Use your head stick around a while you will know who knows there stuff. Like everywhere you get what you pay for. If you read the threads posted by someone thanks that worked well is simple and related to topic. Rating systems always invite abuse it invalid resilts


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

eplc said:


> back in the 60's mondo the mechanic was a bad mechanic... He just replaced things (at your cost) until the problem went away. My grandfather was not mechanically minded and as a result mondo was the expert. This cost my grandfather much $$$ for many unnecessary repairs. Human ego being what it is promotes "experts" simply because someone knows more than you do about a certain topic. I predict that the mondo's of archery talk will get very high marks from those less knowledgeable.


 excellent !!.


----------



## Strodav (Apr 25, 2012)

aread said:


> I'm against a rating system. There are too many members who are too petty to make a rating system useful.
> 
> IMO, if you want something that distinguishes the more helpful members, a "thank you" system would be much better. They have one on TradTalk that seems to work well.
> 
> Allen


Well said. A rating system smacks of something other than American values. Why don't you create your own forum and ask everyone to fill out an application where you can decide who is worthy. That should fill your need for control.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Strodav said:


> Well said. A rating system smacks of something other than American values. Why don't you create your own forum and ask everyone to fill out an application where you can decide who is worthy. That should fill your need for control.


I'm not sure exactly who that "need for control" part is directed at. And who is the "you" that needs to "create your own forum"?


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

just read "back in the 60`s with mondo" besides my laughing that is an excellent statement ! i also hope i can remember that mondo story. very-very good point,Pete53


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

Pete53 said:


> just read "back in the 60`s with mondo" besides my laughing that is an excellent statement ! i also hope i can remember that mondo story. very-very good point,Pete53


I totally agree! And the fact is, today's Mondo has the benefit of technology to be able to disseminate their misinformation with the stroke of a keypad, another "video," or some more deceptive photo's with lines and graphs attached!


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Please stay on topic.


----------



## horsehands (Jul 25, 2012)

Nah.We dont need a "feather in the hat" contest here.Let the newbys sort out the good, the bad,the ugly,and the famous(in thier own mind).Ratings are usually jacked-up anyway.


----------



## Kwag (Jan 13, 2013)

Blue X said:


> You have to view archery talk post like eating ham.
> 
> Eat the ham and leave the bone. If it helps u keep it and if it don't leave it on the plate.
> 
> ...


We have a winner!


----------



## Taint (Nov 9, 2014)

Bees said:


> things happening on a subconscious level during the activity that the archer is totally unaware of.
> 
> 
> no one can comment on what is happening on the subconscious level because you don't know about it.
> ...


So is this the ham part or the bone part ?
Personally I think its next level


----------



## jwrigley (Nov 8, 2012)

For what it's worth and I understand I'm going against the grain here, but I think a system by which somebody who is new to competition archery can come here and ask a question and have an clue as to how he or she should take on board that advice without having to trawl through hundreds of posts to try and make their own judgement. Bearing in mind that they may have no frame of reference to differentiate between a sound answer and one that may sound like someone knows what they're talking about but really hasn't a bulls notion.

The problem is as has been pointed out these things can get political, questions as to who does the rating etc.

I would propose that members here rate themselves on a simple scale (eg. Beginner, intermediate, advanced, semi-pro and Pro) That way people can make their own judgement. I'd also propose in this scenario that if you want to claim that you are a pro or semi-pro you need to pm the Mod with your name and these things are very easily checked. 

To someone who knows what's what it's quite easy to spot who knows what they're talking about and often those who don't. I'm thinking of the people who come here for advice.

That's my .02c - flame away if you wish.


----------



## GrahamJ (Apr 24, 2014)

Ok, I'll play! I am a beginner with a couple years of experience, but my opinion is not worth much. I don't know if such a system is needed, for all the reasons mentioned above. I have read lots on here and commented little (that way i hear more stupid things than i say). Those members here who have a lot of value to add to the discussion become pretty obvious to me after a while by the nature of their posts- they are neither personal nor inflammatory, but they graciously offer assistance where it is requested. In the interests of keeping track of who really knows their stuff, I started to make a personal list of those who I go out of my way to read. I could post it, but it would probably be incomplete. Thanks to all who post on here and answer the same questions over and over, and keep providing polite, professional responses. Keep up the good work. Someday, I hope to get close to your level of the game!
Graham


----------



## ron w (Jan 5, 2013)

you're absolutely right, thinking that such system by which people could "see" who's giving the best advice and answers would be great !.......
the problem is that in an open forum, it's just won't work, because everyone with a little knowledge, wants to be considered the guy with the answers and get his or her name in that first list. 
I can see a real influx, of not good advice and answers being posted, but an influx of slanderous, condescending rhetorical posts, to prove someone wrong. no-one wants to admit they might not be the most knowledgeable person here, if it means not getting their name on some "list".
threads will become not a list of varying ideas and opinions, but a list of arguments, disagreements and evaluations about whether the advice is respective of a shooters level of archery experience, or not.
in many ways this site is like that now, I would hate to see it get worse.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

First, I'm as bad the next person. When a subject has been "beat to death", as in "whipping a dead horse" the subject should be dropped, locked out. Perhaps on a different subject I might feel different, but not here.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Not sure it needs to be locked, but we certainly do see where this is going, has gone.
I'll give it a little bit before locking it down.


----------



## Wenty (Jan 6, 2012)

I don't think its needed. It doesn't take long to figure out who the helpful members are. Doesn't take long to figure out who the tools are. 

Both type member are very clearly recognized. The cream always rises to the top.


----------



## Joe Schnur (Mar 22, 2012)

1 vote for lock


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

If I knew how I'd rate this thread as a negative something. :wink:


----------

