To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.loc.auOpen lugnet.loc.au in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Local / Australia / 10096
10095  |  10097
Subject: 
Re: .loc.au stats for October
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.loc.au
Date: 
Sat, 9 Nov 2002 16:47:43 GMT
Viewed: 
779 times
  
In lugnet.loc.au, Stephen Hurn writes:
I'm still waiting on the scale that is based on quality of post rather than
quantity....

Perhaps some ideas for grading could be:
-Average word quality multiplied by the total number of words that a
LUGNetter posts
-The Sum of all Quality posts
-The sum of all quality posts minus the poor quality posts
-An average quality per word ratio

Of course, to do this we'd need to work out how to measure the quality per
word or post quality values...

Or you could let each post start at a value of 100 points, then add or subtract
other points for 'good' or 'bad' qualities. For loc.au we could have...
* bonus 10 points for mentioning something actually relevant to Lego.
* lose 50 points for mentioning a sale a week after the start of the sale.
* use of the word Belville in any part of the post and lose all points.
* use of the word Bionicle in any part of the post and lose all points.
* use of the terms 'Life on Mars' and 'impulse sets' in same post, lose
all points.
* blatant traffic-generating post, points are halved.
* expression of anti-American sentiment, lose 5 points, then add 10 points.
* useful set review, total points are doubled.
* novel alternate use of an element illustrated, bonus 25 points.
* commercial tagline, no penalty, but you must buy your next set from BLink,
at 5 times it's RRP.
* Any dissing of the Guild of DickSmiths(GODS) in a post, lose 1 point.
* 10 points for each reply your post receives.
* provide link to unmoderated BShelf page, lose 50 points.

pete.w (fast approaching zero)



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: .loc.au stats for October
 
I'm still waiting on the scale that is based on quality of post rather than quantity.... Perhaps some ideas for grading could be: -Average word quality multiplied by the total number of words that a LUGNetter posts -The Sum of all Quality posts -The (...) (22 years ago, 4-Nov-02, to lugnet.loc.au)

21 Messages in This Thread:











Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR