So far for 2009 I have an Advisor badge. If I don't get any further than Advisor in 2009 will the new badge that follows me in 2010 be Advisor 09 or do I have to start from scratch and be a Contributor?

If I'm understanding it correctly, you would keep the Advisor '09 badge in 2010 until you make enough points to qualify for the Contributor '10 badge.  Then you would work your way up the categories for the remainder of 2010. So yes, you're gathering points from scratch every year.

I was confused at first too, because I thought the purpose of the badges was just renaming the Writer1/Writer2/Writer3/Writer4/PC designations.  It wasn't until I saw two Advisor badges on my profile that I realized the badges are based on points per year.

I personally prefer not to have to reboot the process every single year, but I'll go along with whatever is decided.

Fardreamer said…

I thought the maxim was "You can fool all the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time."

Still, I totally get what you're trying to say.

To be honest, I like most of the features of the VIP program.  I'm just not too happy with that one feature.

---

You're absolutely right.  The word is "fool" not "please".  It's bad enough that Lincoln was shot to death, let's not misquote the poor guy too!

I'm a little more interested in the all time rank as opposed to the current rank. On the other hand, I can accept the system because it creates an incentive to keep the hits on coming.

One thing I have mentioned before is the helpful votes. I believe that people who are making them are performing a service. However, it's the reciept of them that is incented, not the issuance. If you are worried about thousands of people clicking on reviews, maybe you could say something like 10 points per vote, up to a max of 10 (or 5) per day.

If I were picking a way to display badges, I would agree with Bob. His idea allows for people to choose what follows them.

Maybe you could even add a "wonky" badge that people could have a choice of funny titles to create their own so that even DUISparky would have his perfect badge! 

:)

I personally think too many badges will confuse everyone. We have PC, Founding Members, CL's, Featured Writers, Sweepstakes Winners, the tiers for writing, etc. I like choosing but I do think we should try to keep the confusion factor down some. I suppose it doesn't REALLY matter since, if people want to know what a badge means, they will look that info up but I do feel like we may confuse newer members with so many different titles.

Having said that, I will go with whatever seems to make the most sense overall. I don't know that our badges mean much to others, just to us. I could be wrong but I care a lot more about my badge stash than anyone else. lol.

I like it the way it is.

I can understand Bob's perspective though and think he had a good idea when he said he would like his founding member badge to show.  Maybe that could be shown with a little symbol [like a ribbon] under his picture or something and not be a badge. That is a special designation and not something someone can "earn".

Agreed.  I will take whatever you give us :)  As long as people can continue to mouseover the badge to see all other badges, that works for me.  

Although, I think that clicking a badge should show you that user's "badge profile page", instead of taking you to the levels and explanations.  Since I mentioned before there are too many badges on one's Main Profile, perhaps a "badge profile page" would make sense b/c badges could stack up over time and maybe more stats could be displayed as well (such as 2009 stats for said user, 2008, etc)

I believe also badges don't mean all the much to most and having one or two displayed is plenty.  I still don't like the idea of starting over again every year.  Having your highest badge follow you for a year and then replaced by the points you made that previous year is I believe how it works now.  It would be a programming challenge, and cost a lot of time and some money to change it.

It's not broken.   When it is changed, I'd like to choose my own badge or have 30 days in which to request what badge or badges I want to follow me around.

Regarding the Lincoln quote....  Lincoln said fool all the people more than once and it is quoted by various sources in a few ways.  The one people like the most has been noted, but it is possible and probable that he said it a few different ways.

Just to post my thoughts more recently, I think it's silly to have a badge from a past year follow us.  Either we start fresh each year, or we get the choice of what to post on our profile.  Those seem to be the choices that make the most sense, and I would be fine with any version of those two. 

LaurieM said…

Meredith said…

Hi!

As it's designed now, your highest badge ever earned should follow you regardless of the year it was earned. So let's take you for example - you have VIP '08 following you although your current rank today is Advisor '09. This is what we are hearing feels bizaar and counter-intuitive. It sounds like people expect to see the badge you earned during the current year, not the highest one you've ever earned in the past.

In your example above, you are correct. If you have VIP '09, then it would follow you into 2010 until you achieve Contributor '10. Remember, this is just what we are thinking will be a potential solution. Nothing is final and no changes have been made yet.

Your points do start over each new year as the program is designed now. Your historically-acquired badges never go away... they just don't all follow you.

Several people also asked why we aren't doing lifetime points versus yearly points. The thinking is that we want to give new people a shot at some of the awards too!

Vytas lead the design of badge graphics! He did a great job :)

Hope this helps make sense of it all!

Thanks,

Meredith

---

I'm so confused. So, in 2008 I achieved VIP status and that is the badge that is the one following me right now.

So far for 2009 I have an Advisor badge. If I don't get any further than Advisor in 2009 will the new badge that follows me in 2010 be Advisor 09 or do I have to start from scratch and be a Contributor?

If that's the case, I'd rather it just stayed as PC. 

---

I think the older system was inherently fine.  The only flaws the pre-VIP system had were the size of the Writer labels and the huge, huge review-writing gap between Writer IV and Publishers' Circle.

The more and more I look at the VIP program, the more I want to say, let the highest rank be the one that follows us.  Maybe it might seem like a small thing to most of the members, but I really, really don't want to have the low ranking badge as my display badge come next year.

Saxguy said…

One thing I have mentioned before is the helpful votes. I believe that people who are making them are performing a service. However, it's the reciept of them that is incented, not the issuance. If you are worried about thousands of people clicking on reviews, maybe you could say something like 10 points per vote, up to a max of 10 (or 5) per day.

---

i like that idea. i think it would get more ppl to vote helpful.

Yes I hope some points are rewarded for voting on reviews as discussed earlier.  Limiting them to the first 5 or 10 per day would cut down on some of the possible click and run gamers. 

Perhaps rewarding people for making comments of 50 characters of more (up to three per day) would also be a great idea to encourage reading, voting AND commenting on reviews.

I would like my founders badge to follow me around.

Perhaps two badges could follow a person around.  Current one..everyone could start out with a NEW YEAR BABY BADGE on Jan 1st and have a badge of their choice also follow them.

ChrisJarmick said…

Yes I hope some points are rewarded for voting on reviews as discussed earlier.  Limiting them to the first 5 or 10 per day would cut down on some of the possible click and run gamers. 

Perhaps rewarding people for making comments of 50 characters of more (up to three per day) would also be a great idea to encourage reading, voting AND commenting on reviews.

I would like my founders badge to follow me around.

Perhaps two badges could follow a person around.  Current one..everyone could start out with a NEW YEAR BABY BADGE on Jan 1st and have a badge of their choice also follow them.

 

---

I agree with both points. I wouldn't mind having Founding Member and the baby badge following me or maybe CL and the baby badge. I guess I just feel I worked sooooooo hard to attain my status that seeing myself back down to zero next year would be a total letdown. Still, if that's how it is, I'm not going to go crazy about it. I will just do what I do and move along. But I kind of like the idea of either a little ribbon or something for founding members. We did not earn that status, we were those people who shaped the site.

I definitely think there should be incentive for rating and possibly commenting. It takes me longer to read a review, rate it, and comment than to write my own reviews sometimes. Really!

However the question is, if we mark a review Not Helpful, will that count? Will people just NH others because they can and gain points at the same time? I know I seem suspicious but some of us know of the gaming that happens on other sites and I really would love for VP to be devoid of that for the most part. We have managed to stay true until now and we can continue to if we just put some provisions into place to stop gaming.

Perhaps there's a way to monitor if someone is clickin not helpful votes much more frequently than good ones.   We will of course have some who will disrupt things as we grow, but I don't think it will happen very much and most will go the positive route.   There are some reviews that might deserve the Not Helpful but thankfully not very many and it someone is mostly doing not helpful, they could be put perhaps onto a no points earned status....

(I'll be that would be a challenge to figure out how to do...  wonder if anyone would even try to do that).

If there were too many problems it could always be discontinued...  I think it would be a positive and it is worth trying. 

I've given quite a few No votes and believe every one was deserved. A couple days ago, I found a member with more than 20 reviews of tech products, all copied from CNET.com. I gave several of them No votes and reported them, but last I knew there was no action against this person. (It's always possible that this person is the original author from CNET.com, but that is certainly not obvious from the member's profile.)

My point is that No votes are every bit as important as Yes votes and there should be credit for giving them. I bet that it's harder for most people to vote No than it is for Yes, so there shouldn't be a penalty for voting No. (Of course, this assumes there may be points earned for Yes votes.)

I still think that gaming for voting is far-fetched. A single point for a vote is very reasonable. If you think this can be gamed, I urge you to pick 20 reviews and vote on them. It is so slow and tedious that it's just not worth gaming for a point per vote.

The real way to game is with forum posts. At 10 points per pop, single word answers in game threads add up quickly, and they take just a little more time than voting on reviews. (And they're a heckuva lot more fun.) I still think that there should be a graduated scale for forum posting points, with up to 20 characters worth 2 points, up to 50 characters for 5 points and more than 50 characters worth 10 points. Or something like that.

Somehow, the concept of gaming got associated with earning a point for helpful votes. If you think this can be gamed, try voting on 20 reviews and see if you think any normal person would bother. Those 20 points would be MUCH easier to earn with two one-word forum posts.

--Bob

bkovacs said…

I've given quite a few No votes and believe every one was deserved. A couple days ago, I found a member with more than 20 reviews of tech products, all copied from CNET.com. I gave several of them No votes and reported them, but last I knew there was no action against this person. (It's always possible that this person is the original author from CNET.com, but that is certainly not obvious from the member's profile.)

My point is that No votes are every bit as important as Yes votes and there should be credit for giving them. I bet that it's harder for most people to vote No than it is for Yes, so there shouldn't be a penalty for voting No. (Of course, this assumes there may be points earned for Yes votes.)

I still think that gaming for voting is far-fetched. A single point for a vote is very reasonable. If you think this can be gamed, I urge you to pick 20 reviews and vote on them. It is so slow and tedious that it's just not worth gaming for a point per vote.

The real way to game is with forum posts. At 10 points per pop, single word answers in game threads add up quickly, and they take just a little more time than voting on reviews. (And they're a heckuva lot more fun.) I still think that there should be a graduated scale for forum posting points, with up to 20 characters worth 2 points, up to 50 characters for 5 points and more than 50 characters worth 10 points. Or something like that.

Somehow, the concept of gaming got associated with earning a point for helpful votes. If you think this can be gamed, try voting on 20 reviews and see if you think any normal person would bother. Those 20 points would be MUCH easier to earn with two one-word forum posts.

--Bob

---

Agreed and cosigned.I do think NO votes are valuable votes and we did take time to read and vote. I vote No often. Not because I am trying to hurt anyone but because the reviews aren't at all helpful. I could explain every No vote I have given although they are self explanatory with just a glance.

I agree that one or two word posts in Games are much easier to do and game. You get more points and it takes a lot less time. That is not to say people playing games are gaming the system for points. I am just saying, Bob, that you make a good point about the easiest and fastest way to "game" for points if one wanted to.

Having thought about it, I agree that points, if they are being offered for votes, should be offered for Yes and No votes and anyone who votes No very often should have the reviews looked at to see if they warrant the No vote.

I still like the idea of a ribbon or something for Founding Members along with a badge though. :)

PattyTherre said…

bkovacs said…

I've given quite a few No votes and believe every one was deserved. A couple days ago, I found a member with more than 20 reviews of tech products, all copied from CNET.com. I gave several of them No votes and reported them, but last I knew there was no action against this person. (It's always possible that this person is the original author from CNET.com, but that is certainly not obvious from the member's profile.)

My point is that No votes are every bit as important as Yes votes and there should be credit for giving them. I bet that it's harder for most people to vote No than it is for Yes, so there shouldn't be a penalty for voting No. (Of course, this assumes there may be points earned for Yes votes.)

I still think that gaming for voting is far-fetched. A single point for a vote is very reasonable. If you think this can be gamed, I urge you to pick 20 reviews and vote on them. It is so slow and tedious that it's just not worth gaming for a point per vote.

The real way to game is with forum posts. At 10 points per pop, single word answers in game threads add up quickly, and they take just a little more time than voting on reviews. (And they're a heckuva lot more fun.) I still think that there should be a graduated scale for forum posting points, with up to 20 characters worth 2 points, up to 50 characters for 5 points and more than 50 characters worth 10 points. Or something like that.

Somehow, the concept of gaming got associated with earning a point for helpful votes. If you think this can be gamed, try voting on 20 reviews and see if you think any normal person would bother. Those 20 points would be MUCH easier to earn with two one-word forum posts.

--Bob

---

Agreed and cosigned.I do think NO votes are valuable votes and we did take time to read and vote. I vote No often. Not because I am trying to hurt anyone but because the reviews aren't at all helpful. I could explain every No vote I have given although they are self explanatory with just a glance.

I agree that one or two word posts in Games are much easier to do and game. You get more points and it takes a lot less time. That is not to say people playing games are gaming the system for points. I am just saying, Bob, that you make a good point about the easiest and fastest way to "game" for points if one wanted to.

Having thought about it, I agree that points, if they are being offered for votes, should be offered for Yes and No votes and anyone who votes No very often should have the reviews looked at to see if they warrant the No vote.

I still like the idea of a ribbon or something for Founding Members along with a badge though. :)

---

And, of course, the whole points-for-posting-in-discussion boards thing is one of my least favorite features about the new VIP system.

Yes, it's awfully nice that the DBs exist.  I love DBs and I've always joined them no matter where I was reviewing.  Whether it was at Amazon, Epinions or here, if a DB exists, you're probably going to find posts by me in it. 

I'm even sort of glad that there's an incentive for posting in this DB, which sets Viewpoints distinctly apart from the other two sites because there you can post till your fingers bleed or fall off or cramp and it doesn't affect a reviewer's ranking one bit.

Here, though, I'm sort of a schizophrenic, because now that I get points for posting in a discussion, I'm both trying to join in conversations and be sociable, yes, but at the same time I'm also thinking, "Hey, maybe this will help me get a VIP badge before December 31!"   I'm not deliberately gaming the system, but the fact that I do get a point or whatever it is I get does have a rather insidious feel to it even if my intention is to join a convo or vent about glitches or what I want/don't want in the VIP program.

Another thought that occurs to me is this.  Reading reviews takes time. Voting either Yes or No takes time.  Commenting takes time.  Writing reviews takes mucho tiempo.  Shouldn't more weight be given, points-wise, to those activities?  I say this because posting and reading posts also takes time as well, and if we are in here instead of "out there" reading, commenting and voting...well, all I can say is that I've noticed a steep dropoff in votes and page hits. 

I don't know. I suppose I sort of like the previous system better. 

PattyTherre said…

bkovacs said…

I've given quite a few No votes and believe every one was deserved. A couple days ago, I found a member with more than 20 reviews of tech products, all copied from CNET.com. I gave several of them No votes and reported them, but last I knew there was no action against this person. (It's always possible that this person is the original author from CNET.com, but that is certainly not obvious from the member's profile.)

My point is that No votes are every bit as important as Yes votes and there should be credit for giving them. I bet that it's harder for most people to vote No than it is for Yes, so there shouldn't be a penalty for voting No. (Of course, this assumes there may be points earned for Yes votes.)

I still think that gaming for voting is far-fetched. A single point for a vote is very reasonable. If you think this can be gamed, I urge you to pick 20 reviews and vote on them. It is so slow and tedious that it's just not worth gaming for a point per vote.

The real way to game is with forum posts. At 10 points per pop, single word answers in game threads add up quickly, and they take just a little more time than voting on reviews. (And they're a heckuva lot more fun.) I still think that there should be a graduated scale for forum posting points, with up to 20 characters worth 2 points, up to 50 characters for 5 points and more than 50 characters worth 10 points. Or something like that.

Somehow, the concept of gaming got associated with earning a point for helpful votes. If you think this can be gamed, try voting on 20 reviews and see if you think any normal person would bother. Those 20 points would be MUCH easier to earn with two one-word forum posts.

--Bob

---

Agreed and cosigned.I do think NO votes are valuable votes and we did take time to read and vote. I vote No often. Not because I am trying to hurt anyone but because the reviews aren't at all helpful. I could explain every No vote I have given although they are self explanatory with just a glance.

I agree that one or two word posts in Games are much easier to do and game. You get more points and it takes a lot less time. That is not to say people playing games are gaming the system for points. I am just saying, Bob, that you make a good point about the easiest and fastest way to "game" for points if one wanted to.

Having thought about it, I agree that points, if they are being offered for votes, should be offered for Yes and No votes and anyone who votes No very often should have the reviews looked at to see if they warrant the No vote.

I still like the idea of a ribbon or something for Founding Members along with a badge though. :)

---

maybe there should be a limit for earning points on posting on the discussion boards too. i do like playing the games on there but could honestly care less if i get points for doing so.

That's my sentiment as well.  However, I think there would be some opposition to that idea.

yes but won't there always be opposition to whatever choice is made?

Of course. It is human nature to oppose changes that may not turn out to be in one's favor.

I do know that there will be some support for minimizing the point value for posting in the discussion boards.  I think DB posts should count toward VIP status but only so far. Others, of course, don't agree with that.

i think that to have an incentive to write reviews is great. after all we are on a site that is built on reviews. so it's only logical to give points for reviews. however we don't have to post to the discussion boards. that is just an added bonus to being a part of viewpoints.  but when some people post 20 things a day that adds up. that's 200 points almost as if you wrote a review. i just think it's a little unfair that some people take the time to write reviews and gain points toward VIP status but then there are ppl who get tons a points a day just for posting somethings on the discussion boards.  (just my opinion)

so, i do think there should be a limit on posting on the discussion boards. people should post just b/c its fun or whatever the purpose is. if ppl stop posting on the discussion boards b/c of not earning points so be it.

That would be a logical solution...and yet, it is one which would not sit well with some of the members.

My feelings about this are in conflict.  I don't post on the DBs because I want the points; I post if I see a topic on the list that I believe I can contribute whatever bits of insight, wit or bon mots I have at the moment.

I don't want to say it's fair or unfair, because I'm keenly aware that there will be those who think they're being criticized for what they like to do.  Yet, I agree with you that reviews, votes, reads and comments should be given a bit more weight than DB posts.

I disagree, there won't be much (if any) opposition.  Many people have already stated that they don't care if they get points for the boards or not.

Well, people follow the incentives that are set. Hence, discussion board posts like this one.

Saxguy said…

Well, people follow the incentives that are set. Hence, discussion board posts like this one.

---

Ha! Good point, John. 

I have to be brutally honest here. I posted here before the VIP program kicked in and will continue to do so regardless of whether we get points or not.  I love DBs because I rarely get to socialize IRL (in real life) and like exchanging ideas. 

Now, if I could pump out two or three reviews every day (I can do it when I have the time, but not every day), I'd be posting here a bit less because I'm a reviewer first and foremost.  However, I can't do that...unless I were to clone myself and have one me do the reviews!

Limiting the amount of points you can earn per day by posting on the discussion boards could be done.  Some might take that as a challenge to figure out ways to 'game' the system in another way however.

 I realized the other day I had a  jump on my point total because I was home, bored and made many many posts on the boards--which is something I rarely do.  

If the discussion board activity helps the site earn money from other sources than it makes sense to reward discussion board contributions generously.  I think it's a good thing that discussion board participation is encouraged and backed up with the rewarding of points....

but I certainly believe reviews and the direct support of the reviews with yes and  no votes and commenting are much more valuable and giving points in those areas are more important than on the discussion boards.

At some sites there are people whose social life revolves around the discussion board.  They don't get points at these sites for their participation... their reward I suppose is feeling like they have a community of people they can communicate to ( a bit sad I think..).  I can see where people can take advantage of this here and boost their points.

I think if someone really needs to feel better about themselves and more important by doing this.. it's okay.  They have a need and it's being filled and it's not actually hurting anyone.  It might be helping someone.  Giving them a boost of confidence and little self-esteem.  Pretty shallow way to do it.. but it isn't hurting anyone.  I want people feeling good about themselves and feeling better about themselves.  Better world for everyone with more people like that around.

However, for the betterment of the site, rewarding activities that help the site in a more proportionate manner is  logical.  You don't have to take away anything to do it.. you can just add.

A few people will feel competitive and take the attitude that 'it's not fair... it's kind of cheating.. isn't it' that someone who posts a lot on the discussion board gets a bigger badge than someone who writes ten times more quality reviews.   

But it is easy to see who writes what and so what if someone gets more points because they post a lot in the discussion boards....it's small thinking to let it bother you.

And if it really does bug you... get out more, enjoy other aspects of your life, don't get obsessed with this or any other website and let it become THAT important to you.

Maybe I missed this because I only read page 1 and 3 of this DB but what does it matter what follows you? It seems as though if you hover near a posters name all of their badges are right there for you to see. So current status seems to be the way to go because you can always check to see post status.

Fardreamer said…

---

 

Another thought that occurs to me is this.  Reading reviews takes time. Voting either Yes or No takes time.  Commenting takes time.  Writing reviews takes mucho tiempo.  Shouldn't more weight be given, points-wise, to those activities?  I say this because posting and reading posts also takes time as well, and if we are in here instead of "out there" reading, commenting and voting...well, all I can say is that I've noticed a steep dropoff in votes and page hits.

---

I agree with you 100%. Couldn't have said it better myself!

Well put.