I'm looking to understand one of the features on the forum website.
Each member has a "user attitude" score, which seems to be made up of the average of all the ratings given to that member by other forum members.
I noticed today that my user rating is 5.33.
It used to be 8.xx.
I'm curious - why did somebody rate me initially quite highly? If I did something valuable or useful for somebody, it would be good to know what that was so I can do more of it.
Equally, to now have a score of 5.33, I must have picked up a very low rating from somebody. So if I have done something to annoy or upset this individual, it would be useful to know what, so I can learn from this and not repeat any mistake in the future. Of course, if it is down to a simple disagreement of ideas, that cannot be helped.
So my interest is in the utility of this rating system. I understand that some people may wish to rate others anonymously. My view is that if you do not have the courage to give your rating and feedback to a member and reveal your identity, you only serve to devalue to some extent the way it might be received.
Perhaps the system could be amended so that in giving the rating you MUST provide some indication as to why - good or bad. You may choose to reveal your identity or not - the option should be there.
As things stand, I can only speculate as to what I may have done, or not done, that has upset one or two people.
It won't stop me from contributing to this forum where and when I can. And without useful feedback, I can't change how or what I do except by my own whim - which could be equally problematic!
I look forward to an exchange of views on this topic from other members.
Best wishes,
Martin
From United Kingdom,
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
14Each member has a "user attitude" score, which seems to be made up of the average of all the ratings given to that member by other forum members.
I noticed today that my user rating is 5.33.
It used to be 8.xx.
I'm curious - why did somebody rate me initially quite highly? If I did something valuable or useful for somebody, it would be good to know what that was so I can do more of it.
Equally, to now have a score of 5.33, I must have picked up a very low rating from somebody. So if I have done something to annoy or upset this individual, it would be useful to know what, so I can learn from this and not repeat any mistake in the future. Of course, if it is down to a simple disagreement of ideas, that cannot be helped.
So my interest is in the utility of this rating system. I understand that some people may wish to rate others anonymously. My view is that if you do not have the courage to give your rating and feedback to a member and reveal your identity, you only serve to devalue to some extent the way it might be received.
Perhaps the system could be amended so that in giving the rating you MUST provide some indication as to why - good or bad. You may choose to reveal your identity or not - the option should be there.
As things stand, I can only speculate as to what I may have done, or not done, that has upset one or two people.
It won't stop me from contributing to this forum where and when I can. And without useful feedback, I can't change how or what I do except by my own whim - which could be equally problematic!
I look forward to an exchange of views on this topic from other members.
Best wishes,
Martin
From United Kingdom,
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Martin,
I'm looking to understand one of the features on the forum website. Each member has a "user attitude" score, which seems to be made up of the average of all the ratings given to that member by other forum members. I noticed today that my user rating is 5.33. It used to be 8.xx. I'm curious - why did somebody rate me initially quite highly? If I did something valuable or useful for somebody, it would be good to know what that was so I can do more of it.
Equally, to now have a score of 5.33, I must have picked up a very low rating from somebody. So if I have done something to annoy or upset this individual, it would be useful to know what, so I can learn from this and not repeat any mistake in the future. Of course, if it is down to a simple disagreement of ideas, that cannot be helped.
So my interest is in the utility of this rating system. I understand that some people may wish to rate others anonymously. My view is that if you do not have the courage to give your rating and feedback to a member and reveal your identity, you only serve to devalue to some extent the way it might be received. Perhaps the system could be amended so that in giving the rating you MUST provide some indication as to why - good or bad. You may choose to reveal your identity or not - the option should be there.
As things stand, I can only speculate as to what I may have done, or not done, that has upset one or two people. It won't stop me from contributing to this forum where and when I can. Without useful feedback, I can't change how or what I do except by my own whim - which could be equally problematic.
I look forward to an exchange of views on this topic from other members.
Best wishes,
Martin
Dear Martin, Namaskar,
I had raised this point on page 13 of the thread "Attitude." Till page 17, no conclusion came up. Will you please look into this discussion and post your observations before we proceed further?
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I'm looking to understand one of the features on the forum website. Each member has a "user attitude" score, which seems to be made up of the average of all the ratings given to that member by other forum members. I noticed today that my user rating is 5.33. It used to be 8.xx. I'm curious - why did somebody rate me initially quite highly? If I did something valuable or useful for somebody, it would be good to know what that was so I can do more of it.
Equally, to now have a score of 5.33, I must have picked up a very low rating from somebody. So if I have done something to annoy or upset this individual, it would be useful to know what, so I can learn from this and not repeat any mistake in the future. Of course, if it is down to a simple disagreement of ideas, that cannot be helped.
So my interest is in the utility of this rating system. I understand that some people may wish to rate others anonymously. My view is that if you do not have the courage to give your rating and feedback to a member and reveal your identity, you only serve to devalue to some extent the way it might be received. Perhaps the system could be amended so that in giving the rating you MUST provide some indication as to why - good or bad. You may choose to reveal your identity or not - the option should be there.
As things stand, I can only speculate as to what I may have done, or not done, that has upset one or two people. It won't stop me from contributing to this forum where and when I can. Without useful feedback, I can't change how or what I do except by my own whim - which could be equally problematic.
I look forward to an exchange of views on this topic from other members.
Best wishes,
Martin
Dear Martin, Namaskar,
I had raised this point on page 13 of the thread "Attitude." Till page 17, no conclusion came up. Will you please look into this discussion and post your observations before we proceed further?
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Martin,
I understand your concern about the user attitude rating. I myself got very disturbed when my rating dropped from 10 to 7.5. Still don't understand what I did wrong. :icon1:
I am not very open to the idea of direct feedback on users - mainly because it may tend to encourage rivalry. I will try to find some other way this can be done. Give me some time on this one as currently the CiteMan domain is being re-developed.
Warm regards,
CHR
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I understand your concern about the user attitude rating. I myself got very disturbed when my rating dropped from 10 to 7.5. Still don't understand what I did wrong. :icon1:
I am not very open to the idea of direct feedback on users - mainly because it may tend to encourage rivalry. I will try to find some other way this can be done. Give me some time on this one as currently the CiteMan domain is being re-developed.
Warm regards,
CHR
From India, Gurgaon
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
i also agree with this point. rather than being an anonymous thing , it must be mandatorily structured format.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
What I believe is that rating is done based on how much data you mail. The more data, the higher the scores. I may be wrong, but this is what I have perceived. Initially, my rating was never more than 10 points, and now it's never more than 5-6 points. I think it's computerized based on words, and scoring is done automatically.
Regards,
Promila
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What I believe is that rating is done based on how much data you mail. The more data, the higher the scores. I may be wrong, but this is what I have perceived. Initially, my rating was never more than 10 points, and now it's never more than 5-6 points. I think it's computerized based on words, and scoring is done automatically.
Regards,
Promila
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No Promila ji. This is not correct. The next below points are given on that basis. In any case, it is a crisis of judiciousness/judgment. rgards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Martin, I wouldn't worry too much about it. I'm not sure the score is a very meaningful feature of this otherwise excellent site. All users start at zero so on balance you're on the "up and up" :)
My own rating dropped substantially over time with no apparent reason. I have rated others myself, sometimes high, sometimes low. I have to be either really impressed or really irritated to rate. Good quality, original insights rate high for me.
I give low ratings when I get fed up with one or two-word replies that contribute nothing to a discussion (other than to give the author points). I also get irritated by the excessive use of quotes (same reason). Prejudice (racial, career, or any other type of prejudice) is another thing I don't have a lot of time for. However, in the end, regardless of your personal rating, people will read your contributions if it meets their needs or aligns with their interests. Happy posting.
From Australia, Ballarat
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My own rating dropped substantially over time with no apparent reason. I have rated others myself, sometimes high, sometimes low. I have to be either really impressed or really irritated to rate. Good quality, original insights rate high for me.
I give low ratings when I get fed up with one or two-word replies that contribute nothing to a discussion (other than to give the author points). I also get irritated by the excessive use of quotes (same reason). Prejudice (racial, career, or any other type of prejudice) is another thing I don't have a lot of time for. However, in the end, regardless of your personal rating, people will read your contributions if it meets their needs or aligns with their interests. Happy posting.
From Australia, Ballarat
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Namaskar Numerouno ji. Do you mean to say freedom of expression and judiciousness must go hand in hand and here it is OK? regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friends,
Numerouno probably has not got time to clarify. However, I feel that it is quite pleasurable to enjoy freedom of expression. But exercising it with reference to judiciousness is a difficult task. Judiciousness requires that one will have to suspend his/her likes/dislikes, tendencies to push someone upward or pull downwards just for a heck of it. In any case, whether we look progressively or comparatively, judiciousness is a rare commodity. I wish it to be available charitably. Dear friend! Please explore it within yourselves.
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Numerouno probably has not got time to clarify. However, I feel that it is quite pleasurable to enjoy freedom of expression. But exercising it with reference to judiciousness is a difficult task. Judiciousness requires that one will have to suspend his/her likes/dislikes, tendencies to push someone upward or pull downwards just for a heck of it. In any case, whether we look progressively or comparatively, judiciousness is a rare commodity. I wish it to be available charitably. Dear friend! Please explore it within yourselves.
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
360 Degree Feedback System.ppt
A USER'S GUIDE TO 360° FEEDBACK (1).doc
User Manual - Online Stationery Request Management System.pdf