Rules for Regulars

[GulliverFoyle]

@subextraordinaire

@nemomen does have some fantastic bird photos in the pets thread!

Pet thread is my happy place when I’m stressed out at work.

[hello_friends]

@codinghorror

it is better to favor listening

I heard you the first time.

[GulliverFoyle]

@codinghorror

What does this mean? Literal duplicated topics? Like how?

Maybe not literally, but contributors posting the same topic and material, albeit with their own thoughts, seemingly unaware another contributor “scooped” them, seems to happen at least a couple times a month.

@codinghorror

Think about it this way: a group of say 20 super chatty folks could pretty easily generate more content than one person could ever possibly read. Up that to 50, 100, 200 people and beyond and it’s no contest. There is a fundamental data asymmetry in talking vs. listening that means it is better to favor listening, even putting aside the moral reason that the worst conversations are with people who aren’t actually listening to you or anyone in the conversation.

Wait, are you saying we have limits on how many comments we can post in a given time period? I literally had no idea. Is there somewhere where all this is listed? The local planning department in Alpha Centauri perhaps?

[nimelennar]

@daneel

@nimelennar

the snazzy title under your name

Yeah, I don’t really like that at all. Unless it’s customizable, that could be fun.

I think that all of the gold-level non-post-specific badges should be available as titles (Admired, Crazy in Love, and Empathetic, specifically - I wouldn’t object to Champion either, but no one has it).

It makes the title meaningful, as none of the gold-level badges are particularly easy to get, but spreads the love around a bit beyond just the Regulars.

[fiddlingfrog]

@nimelennar

It’s done automatically by metrics (what we have now). The only human intervention required is to tweak the metrics to select the right people.

I think it’s obvious that’s the only reasonable path forward. Where I feel the tweaking should occur is not necessarily in the levels of the metrics, but in the combination and time scale. So maybe it measures posts read or posts made _o_r likes received, and instead of dropping out of regular as soon as one of those falls below the threshold, you have a few weeks time to bring that metric back up to snuff.

[Melizmatic]

@codinghorror

Because listening is more important than talking, e.g. Because Reading is Fundamental

It’s not really germane to your serious discussion here, but you said it, and so I have to:

[chgoliz]

@codinghorror

What stands out to me is the big read disparity, it makes sense that slybevel would achieve regular sooner because the amount of daily reading is much higher.

Yes, but why not also reward someone who is replying 3x more and is communicating at a strong level as exhibited by the likes given and received? Technically, @Mindysan33 is a more productive and supportive member of this community, based on the metrics you listed.

Edited to add: I see the conversation already went here and beyond. I’ve had very little down time with a computer at arm’s length recently, so I’m woefully behind in every thread. Sorry!

[nimelennar]

@fiddlingfrog

So maybe it measures posts read or posts made or likes received, and instead of dropping out of regular as soon as one of those falls below the threshold, you have a few weeks time to bring that metric back up to snuff.

Currently, we have these following:

However, in order to avoid constant promotion/demotion situations, there is a 2-week grace period immediately after gaining Trust Level 3 during which you will not be demoted.

So, instead of the grace period starting when you are promoted, you’re suggesting that it should start when you would have been demoted?

Edit for clarity

[anon8420928]

@fiddlingfrog

instead of dropping out of regular as soon as one of those falls below the threshold, you have a few weeks time to bring that metric back up to snuff.

TL3 comes with a 2 week grace period, just for that purpose. Wouldn’t do to earn TL3 one day and be rejected from The Lounge the very next.

That said, I think former Regulars should get something like an Emeritus Regular badge that shows they’ve been Regulars before (and probably still deserve it).

EDIT:

@nimelennar

So, instead of the grace period starting when you are promoted, you’re suggesting that it starts when you would have been demoted?

@codinghorror / @eviltrout , could we please have an answer to this one? It makes a difference.

[fiddlingfrog]

Sort of. I think that’s probably the best way to implement it right now, but I was thinking something more like “Within the last two months, there was a two week period where you read more than 25% of all posts.” So instead of always examining the last two weeks, the trust system is looking for the trust conditions to have been met once within a longer window.

[d_r]

@chgoliz

I’ve had very little down time with a computer at arm’s length recently

Is this some form of combining work with weight training?

[jsroberts]

How about #1 AND #2? Anyone can get in by the metric route, but there’s also an option to promote someone if they post valued opinions on a limited number of topics? It still might get cliquey, but not if #2 is used rarely enough.

[telecinese]

@codinghorror

One negative side effect of these lol-tastic chat topics is that they artificially inflate required read time for all other users. Which is and could prevent people from attaining regular, or prevent them from keeping it.

Yes. I’ve mentioned this, a few times by now.

But then again, as someone who was an almost-but-not-quite-regular for the longest time, then regular’ed instantly by grinding the questions thread (which is why I pick on that one), then lost it, regained it, and lost it again by, well, not being regular enough: it makes no real difference, does it?

I mean, a flauntable title under your name is fun for the first few times you see it, but everything else? I’ve never ran out of likes ever, the title-correcting power is of marginal use to begin with and further nerfed by having no effect on the category or the post title outside the BBS. The lounge was fun, if uneventful, but it’s not like there were dozens of interesting regular-only conversations going on.

So…

I do kind of want my ‘egomaniac’ badge for rampant self-quoting and/or self-linking. I think I’m podium-level in that around here, if literally nothing else. Slackers.

[anon8420928]

@telecinese

Slackers.

'Scuse me?

[renke]

@chgoliz

Technically, @Mindysan33 is a more productive and supportive member of this community, based on the metrics you listed.

What is the function of the regulars’ group?

Looking at dissolving blue dots I noticed two rather distinct motivations

• a “reward” for active community members
• enabling self-policing to relieve mods

The first one should focused on high-quality comments and acceptance of the community (both points are related), the second one needs an understanding of the community and fast recognition of active hot spots - best measured with reading a lot of threads.

Until we I understand the reasoning behind TL3 it’s hard to say “foo deserves it more than bla”.

[anon33466019]

@renke

The first one should focused on high-quality comments and acceptance of the community (both points are related), the second one needs an understanding of the community and fast recognition of active hot spots - best measured with reading a lot of threads.

The first is Regular (or Contributor?), the second is Community Watch. They are, as you say, two different functions.

[telecinese]

Don’t get me wrong, I only mean slacking in the ever-important ‘self-citation’ metric.

Unfortunately, that’s not in the ranking among all the cool discussiony things you guys do better than me. So my lifelong dream of putting my three-letter initials in that particular high score list will remain a fantasy.

[codinghorror]

Based on this discussion I think a cap on total read posts / replies in last 100 days is sensible.

@neil since you worked on TL3 promotion can you take that? Looking at the BBS stats I think it is OK to cap the required

• total posts read in the last 100 days at 20,000
• total topics viewed in the last 100 days at 500

Those are currently sitting at 25,536 and 668 respectively based on the topic and post volume here at BBS, which is a very busy site. With these caps in place, on average that means a regular needs to enter 5 topics per day, and read 200 posts per day to be on track to keep regular status.

Those should be site settings as well, but as absolute upper limit caps, I think they are safer defaults, and will make regular a bit easier to achieve without artificially limiting chat-like rapid reply topics.

As to whether 5 topics/day and 200 posts/day are reasonable daily read requirements, let’s look at the 10 most recently bumped topics:

1,100 + 51 + 28 + 199 + 16 + 60 + 18 + 11 + 11 = 1,494

Dropping the 1,100 outlier that’s still 394 replies, almost twice the daily goal for a regular, and doesn’t seem like a ridiculous daily read load to me.

[Kimmo]

Sweet. So shouldn’t my trust level have changed?

[crenquis]