I dont have much against the way this site works, i've been a member here for 3 years and know a lot of you but there is one thing that has kind of bothered me (and to you smart asses around here who are actually gonna check my profile page to see if i have been here as long as i say, go look under my previous profile "capitalize")
Admin ratings are ranks, not ratings like the public ones. I understand this but one thing i think could be taken in consideration is WHEN admins rank things.
Why is it required that an admin ranks a submission as it comes in? Seeing this ranking basically creates a bias towards the submission.
Say somone submits something, admin ranks it. Admin rankings are based on that admins own opinion. So what if the admin dislikes the piece and has his own negative opinion towards it. Obviously, the submission will be ranked low, correct?
Now if i log on to custo and i see a submission on the front page with a ranking of 60, does that make me want to go and look into the submission? No, it makes me think wow that must not be too good, forget it i'm going to look at that submission that has a 90 ranking, it must be good!
Back to the whole "when" thing. Like I said, once i see something ranked low, It discourages me. Why not wait a day or two or any extended period of time to let the public decide without any bias towards the submission. Let it get some comments first, then hit it with rankings.
Which gets me to another point. Why is it up to a single, random admin to decide where your work is placed? Shouldent it be a combined effort of some sort or even average of the public scores? I dont see the nessesity in placeing a random admin to a score and letting them decide whats good. You may think it sucks, but not the rest of the world or even users. You get to say it sucks and say that its going to the same spot all the other shitty submissions are going to be placed.
This I do not think is fair. You wanted a detailed and logical problem/suggestion? There you go.
____________ CAPITALIZEX[/B]
11:22 pm, Wednesday, September 28, 2005 (4 years ago)
I'm not sure about waiting for public opinion before ranking, but I'm definitely for an averaged staff ranking system.
I'm also guilty of not looking at low-ranked submissions, but only on the front page. Usually, I'll browse the "New Uploads" section and look at the pictures instead of the rankings.
Exactly what advent says, who looks at the main page when you can click new uploads and see pictures. I base all my clicks on that thumbnail. But if your waiting for a submission to be judged by the public then the admin will get the impression of the members votes and then we really wouldn't need an admin rating. So i to am for multiple admin ranks
First, I don't like to think that we are "random" admins. I think its fair to say that all of the admins that are ranking have a great degree of experience in the community and have been chosen by the owners for specific reasons. Maybe you don't agree with our opinions and Im not saying our opinions are any more important than anyone elses, but we know what we are talking about for the most part.
Secondly, submission admins do their best to rank what needs to be ranked when they are available to do so. Sometimes a submission is ranked within seconds of being submitted, other times it may sit in the queue for a week. We rank A LOT of submissions already, it would be unreasonable for us all to triple or quadruple how many submissions we rank by having to rank the same pieces as eachother.
"Now if i log on to custo and i see a submission on the front page with a ranking of 60, does that make me want to go and look into the submission? No, it makes me think wow that must not be too good, forget it i'm going to look at that submission that has a 90 ranking, it must be good!"
This shows you have some trust in us admins opinions, which is somewhat a compliment to us. However, you shoudnt just trust one opinion. After all, it is just one opinion. I think the users/community has put too much emphasis on admin rankings. They are no the end all deciding mark for submissions. Just one way of browsing submissions. This topic has been discussed multiple times recently. http://www.customize.org/forum/10113 near the middle/bottom of the thread I make my point a few times
I think too much emphasis is put on staff rankings. Maybe that is something that could change, but I think that is something the users have control of, not the staff.
Thank you for being polite in your suggestion. I appreciate it. Hope my response helps.
Im not sure what the reasoning is for wallpapers not showing up on the front page until they have a staff ranking. But if there isnt a good reason for that, Im sure that is something that could be easily changed.
As far as combined admin scores goes, we have enough trouble getting one admin to rank every sub, let alone 2 or 3.
And any scoring based on average public scores would be abused all to hell, you know that. You'd have people creating multiple accounts to rank 100s on their work and lower scores on others. I hate to say that, but it's true.
The potential for abuse is much lower with the current system, not to say we don't goof up, we do, all the time. But we try, and I think we do okay.
colossus72 [c72] Customize.org Staff member relations, submissions.
"Im not sure what the reasoning is for wallpapers not showing up on the front page until they have a staff ranking."
In the old days when we would get 30 or 40 (usually poor) walls a day the volume of wallpapers tended to overwhelm the skins.
Plus walls are moderated, other subs really are not, not that much anyway. They are subject to greater scrutiny simply because the variation in quality tends to be much wider than in any other submission category.
colossus72 [c72] Customize.org Staff member relations, submissions.
Wow, I'm impressed. I was AWOL for a while... gettin my life in order... and I just now want to come back to this site and I find that it's gotten much more organized than it was a year or so ago. I like how it's coming and I really like this suggestion. Much agreementness.
My sig is indefinitely better than yours, defined by my words.
