The rating isn't about other threads, it's about people. What are you talking about there :confused:
I'm saying we should have some predefined, but more comprehensive, system for grading people, all of these qualities being based on a 1-10 scale. Like this:
And anything you can't define about the person, you leave N/A.
And then you would add the positives (the first part) and the negatives (the second part), and get a total opinion out of the absolute total number of positive questions x 10. For every question you put "N/A", you deduct the absolute total by 10. So, for discussion's sake, here would be a more complete example:
John Smith
Personality: 7/10
Argumentative Skills: 5/10
Creativity: N/A (Since this person has never given any example of his creativity, like a custom sig or avatar, or some manner of poetry or something, I put "N/A".)
Gaming Skill: 6/10
While this would be more complicated, it would make people actually think about what they're posting, and can help pinpoint problems or strong points of a person as related to this forum.
Get me?
I see what you are getting at. that would be a great way to rate someone. Hopefully someone will make a thread like it. Unless someone already did while I was gone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Very cool and outgoing guy. Did you try what I asked you?
SpanishBard: 2/10
Selfish and spammer.
Lol. Ok John. You're not even worth rating.
I wouldn't include all of the ratings. Creativity and Gaming Skills aren't really gradable for the kind of interaction most of us have. I would keep it restricted to post content. Unless you have a reasonable way to define creativity.
I would say.
Post Content(Spam or Useful)
Empty Flamatory Remarks.
English Fluency/Mechanics
Biasness
Let's face it. Most of these grades are a personal relationship with the person. EX: John, FBIM aren't very fond of me. They'll always give me low ratings. Although I post far more contentful things than both of them combined. The one scale is so bland that it mixes personal relationship and actually constructive criticsm into the same scale. You can't really interpret it differently. Point being, a personal relationship should be on a seperate scale if we were to actually divide the grading system. My point of view anyways.
That's why I said that the proposed questions were just examples, silly
And I'd take out bias- bias is something that you'd be using as you're evalutating the person. So you'd be biased about the person's bias...
On the creativity note- My reasons for including it were simple: It would be based on, oh say, the ability of the person to create or concoct amazing signatures, avatars, short stories, poems (there was a thread about this some time ago), responses in the RP threads, etc. Those are reason enough for it. If a person does not qualify for it, you simply put N/A and don't include that in the total.
If your personal relationship, as you call it, is good with the person, that means nothing. Now, if it's defined by quantitative qualities, like I've established, then the person has to actually think about it and not just put "I like so and so just because they agree with everything I say" or "lmfao hez funny lolz".
And no, the majority of them are not personal. Gaming skill, argumentative skill, and flaming are all qualities which can be graded without personal bias, if the person really thinks about the quality of them. For instance, I don't agree with a lot that Equinox says, but she is a very, very good debater, so I would give her a high grade in argumentative skill. Flaming is self-explanatory, everyone knows the people who just go around flaming bullshit everywhere, and whether you're a good friend of the person or not, you know if their flame is "empty" (as you described it) or actually has fact and isn't full of needless vulgar language, in which case it would not be a flame.
And, of course, the whole point of this thread is to display your personal bias for or against the people in it
Well at the same time you were proposing an idea. As I was just responding to a proposed idea, silly.
Your reasoning for creativity makes sense. I was thinking differently along the lines of creativity regarding the content of a post. I wasn't thinking outside of the box apparently.
I never said the majority of your proposed scales were about personal relationship. I said people will develop them to be personal. That's why you have to draw a line between a biased opinion, and an actually credible one. People don't do that. Providing a personal relationship scale will try and make the person think outside of their personal relationship. You're right, this thread holds little purpose besides to say ,"I LIKE THIS PERSON" "I DON'T LIKE THIS PERSON". Then you have the lameos who try and justify their reasoning by pretending that there actually more to their opinion.
"I don't like this person because he's a spammer"
Translation: "I don't like this person because he insulted me in a previous thread, and I still cry about it"
Your idea is a swell one. I'm just saying there really needs to be a more elaborate grading scale. This is one of these threads that I keep reading, even though everyone grades like a moron. I DON'T KNOW YOU 5/10. YOU SAID THIS COMMENT 4/10.
Just to add to your idea. How about actually credible resources to back up a grade. Like:
Jetrall's Creativity: 10/10 - Not only elaborating why. But also referencing an art piece, story piece, website. You know, something that provides a reasonable explanation.
I wouldn't include all of the ratings. Creativity and Gaming Skills aren't really gradable for the kind of interaction most of us have. I would keep it restricted to post content. Unless you have a reasonable way to define creativity.
I would say.
Post Content(Spam or Useful)
Empty Flamatory Remarks.
English Fluency/Mechanics
Biasness
Let's face it. Most of these grades are a personal relationship with the person. EX: John, FBIM aren't very fond of me. They'll always give me low ratings. Although I post far more contentful things than both of them combined. The one scale is so bland that it mixes personal relationship and actually constructive criticsm into the same scale. You can't really interpret it differently. Point being, a personal relationship should be on a seperate scale if we were to actually divide the grading system. My point of view anyways.
Me and Fbim4 aren't the only ones who think you're pointless. Who told you that we were? Equinox?
And dude, read the thread name. Rate the person above you. I did it. And now you call me stupid. Congradulations.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Federer lost Wimbledon. Why? Becase none of you bastards cheered for him...
Well at the same time you were proposing an idea. As I was just responding to a proposed idea, silly.
Touche.
Your reasoning for creativity makes sense. I was thinking differently along the lines of creativity regarding the content of a post. I wasn't thinking outside of the box apparently.
I never said the majority of your proposed scales were about personal relationship. I said people will develop them to be personal. That's why you have to draw a line between a biased opinion, and an actually credible one. People don't do that. Providing a personal relationship scale will try and make the person think outside of their personal relationship. You're right, this thread holds little purpose besides to say ,"I LIKE THIS PERSON" "I DON'T LIKE THIS PERSON". Then you have the lameos who try and justify their reasoning by pretending that there actually more to their opinion.
"I don't like this person because he's a spammer"
Translation: "I don't like this person because he insulted me in a previous thread, and I still cry about it"
Your idea is a swell one. I'm just saying there really needs to be a more elaborate grading scale. This is one of these threads that I keep reading, even though everyone grades like a moron. I DON'T KNOW YOU 5/10. YOU SAID THIS COMMENT 4/10.
Just to add to your idea. How about actually credible resources to back up a grade. Like:
Jetrall's Creativity: 10/10 - Not only elaborating why. But also referencing an art piece, story piece, website. You know, something that provides a reasonable explanation.
And that all makes perfect sense, sorry I didn't see it that way before.
I never said the majority of your proposed scales were about personal relationship. I said people will develop them to be personal. That's why you have to draw a line between a biased opinion, and an actually credible one. People don't do that. Providing a personal relationship scale will try and make the person think outside of their personal relationship. You're right, this thread holds little purpose besides to say ,"I LIKE THIS PERSON" "I DON'T LIKE THIS PERSON". Then you have the lameos who try and justify their reasoning by pretending that there actually more to their opinion.
"I don't like this person because he's a spammer"
Translation: "I don't like this person because he insulted me in a previous thread, and I still cry about it"
Cry? CRY?
I don't like you becuase all of your posts are complete nonsense and you have no idea what you are talking about. I personally think that you are a complete idiot and douche. I know people on this forum who think the same way I do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Federer lost Wimbledon. Why? Becase none of you bastards cheered for him...
W"I don't like this person because he's a spammer"
Translation: "I don't like this person because he insulted me in a previous thread, and I still cry about it"
Get it now?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Federer lost Wimbledon. Why? Becase none of you bastards cheered for him...
"You are like a rose in a great rose field. Each rose is so beautiful to me. But if one dies... I can still look at many other roses..." God of Darkness.
How is SpanishBard a spammer?...(Genuinely confused)
god youre an idiot
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"You are like a rose in a great rose field. Each rose is so beautiful to me. But if one dies... I can still look at many other roses..." God of Darkness.
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Lol. Ok John. You're not even worth rating.
I wouldn't include all of the ratings. Creativity and Gaming Skills aren't really gradable for the kind of interaction most of us have. I would keep it restricted to post content. Unless you have a reasonable way to define creativity.
I would say.
Post Content(Spam or Useful)
Empty Flamatory Remarks.
English Fluency/Mechanics
Biasness
Let's face it. Most of these grades are a personal relationship with the person. EX: John, FBIM aren't very fond of me. They'll always give me low ratings. Although I post far more contentful things than both of them combined. The one scale is so bland that it mixes personal relationship and actually constructive criticsm into the same scale. You can't really interpret it differently. Point being, a personal relationship should be on a seperate scale if we were to actually divide the grading system. My point of view anyways.
And I'd take out bias- bias is something that you'd be using as you're evalutating the person. So you'd be biased about the person's bias...
On the creativity note- My reasons for including it were simple: It would be based on, oh say, the ability of the person to create or concoct amazing signatures, avatars, short stories, poems (there was a thread about this some time ago), responses in the RP threads, etc. Those are reason enough for it. If a person does not qualify for it, you simply put N/A and don't include that in the total.
If your personal relationship, as you call it, is good with the person, that means nothing. Now, if it's defined by quantitative qualities, like I've established, then the person has to actually think about it and not just put "I like so and so just because they agree with everything I say" or "lmfao hez funny lolz".
And no, the majority of them are not personal. Gaming skill, argumentative skill, and flaming are all qualities which can be graded without personal bias, if the person really thinks about the quality of them. For instance, I don't agree with a lot that Equinox says, but she is a very, very good debater, so I would give her a high grade in argumentative skill. Flaming is self-explanatory, everyone knows the people who just go around flaming bullshit everywhere, and whether you're a good friend of the person or not, you know if their flame is "empty" (as you described it) or actually has fact and isn't full of needless vulgar language, in which case it would not be a flame.
And, of course, the whole point of this thread is to display your personal bias for or against the people in it
Your reasoning for creativity makes sense. I was thinking differently along the lines of creativity regarding the content of a post. I wasn't thinking outside of the box apparently.
I never said the majority of your proposed scales were about personal relationship. I said people will develop them to be personal. That's why you have to draw a line between a biased opinion, and an actually credible one. People don't do that. Providing a personal relationship scale will try and make the person think outside of their personal relationship. You're right, this thread holds little purpose besides to say ,"I LIKE THIS PERSON" "I DON'T LIKE THIS PERSON". Then you have the lameos who try and justify their reasoning by pretending that there actually more to their opinion.
"I don't like this person because he's a spammer"
Translation: "I don't like this person because he insulted me in a previous thread, and I still cry about it"
Your idea is a swell one. I'm just saying there really needs to be a more elaborate grading scale. This is one of these threads that I keep reading, even though everyone grades like a moron. I DON'T KNOW YOU 5/10. YOU SAID THIS COMMENT 4/10.
Just to add to your idea. How about actually credible resources to back up a grade. Like:
Jetrall's Creativity: 10/10 - Not only elaborating why. But also referencing an art piece, story piece, website. You know, something that provides a reasonable explanation.
Magistrate: 6.5/10. Really dont know you
XxL2PxX: I give a 5/10. i really dont know you either
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Me and Fbim4 aren't the only ones who think you're pointless. Who told you that we were? Equinox?
And dude, read the thread name. Rate the person above you. I did it. And now you call me stupid. Congradulations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZRQEtAyiTM
You have to admit that he's good.
Touche.
And that all makes perfect sense, sorry I didn't see it that way before.
Cry? CRY?
I don't like you becuase all of your posts are complete nonsense and you have no idea what you are talking about. I personally think that you are a complete idiot and douche. I know people on this forum who think the same way I do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZRQEtAyiTM
You have to admit that he's good.
He was. I said he was a spammer and he still thinks that I'm "all torn up and can't think".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZRQEtAyiTM
You have to admit that he's good.
Get it now?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZRQEtAyiTM
You have to admit that he's good.
this is why i love reading spanish's posts
god youre an idiot
How is SpanishBard a spammer?