The rating system, revisited.

Okay. So here we are a couple months after the bonuses have been shut off. People are still around it seems - That was one of my expectations for when the bonuses went bye-bye, was for a lot of people on Basic to quit because they'd get their moneyflow choked off.

Now though, without ratings being tied to a stipend bonus, I have to ask why we even have them at all. Sinc the bonus cutoff I have not given or recieved a single rating. Not /one/. I used to readily give polite new players a rate-up because it would help them get a little bit of a start, and some money, but now I just give them my piddly 50l straight up and forget bothering with the rating. Whats the point in flushing the precious 25l?

I still like to rate people if I am impressed with the way they act, the way they look, or with something they have built. Even if there is no other effect there, at least they get a more or less permanent mark that says someone was impressed enough with them to rate them. IMHO.

If this is a feature suggestion, then I suggest the rating bonus be reinstated with a curve and cap. Rating someone would cost L$25, and...

Old ratings points would be 5 to a Linden, for a max of 5 Lindens.

Points gained in the last 3 or 4 weeks would be 1 each, up to 20.

Last weeks ratings would be worth L$4 each for the first five points, L$2 for the next five, L$1 for the next ten, and that's it. More "old" rating points don't get you anything.

New ratings would be worth L$20 each for the first five points, L$10 for the next five, L$5 for the next ten, and that's it.

That way: gaming the system would get you at most 5 extra Lindens after 4 weeks: you'd put in L$125 and get back L$100, L$20, L$5, L$5, and then a Linden increment on your stipend.

And working really hard at being a social animal could get you L$285 a week, half the Premium stipend, and take L$500 per week out of circulation. No way to game that, it's just tips.

Something like that was what I was fishing for, Argent, yes. Basicaly get the ball rolling to see if there were any better suggestions out there. Though I'm a little scatterbrained lately... Can you spell that out in clear mathematical/numeric terms please?

Ratings cost L$25

The week you get the rating, you get a L$20 bonus for the first five points you got that week. The next five are worth L$10, and the next ten are worth L$5. Additional ratings points increase your rating but don't get you any bonus. Max new bonus each week is then (20*5 + 10*5 + 5*10) or L$200. The people rating you would have spent (20*25) or L$500 total.

Ratings earned the previous week get you L$4, L$2, and L$1 for each of the three levels. So you'd get an additional (4*5 + 2*5 + 1*10) or L$40.

The next two weeks together would get you another L$20 each.

So if you get 20 rating points every week, you'll get a grand total of L$280 bonus each week, by working your butt off running around being nice to people.

You won't get it by trading ratings, though, because you'd be spending L$500 a week to get L$280 back. You *could* trade ratings for the first 5 points, spending L$125 a week and getting back L$130 a week starting in the FOURTH week... but it'd have cost you L$500 by that point just to start it up. If you want to go through all that hassle for a lousy L$5.

I don't see that option being popular.

Instead of using the ratings as a way to make money, why not make them a way of rating people?

But first, why do we need people to be rated? How often does everyone look at the ratings? If you do, what about them might influence your actions in some way?

What would be BETTER than ratings?

I'm more influenced by what groups someone belongs to. That tells me more about them than the rating numbers. But that's only one dimension. I'd love to be able to see things like: does this person sell a lot of objects, do they host a lot of events, do they attend a lot of events, do they own a lot of land, do they have a lot of calling cards/friends, do they spend their online time in mostly one spot or spread it out over many locations?

All those metrics can be recorded and displayed in a profile. (And some, like land owned, HAS been available since the begining.) I'd find that sort of information, combined with the group list and their Picks, far more telling about a person than ratings.

If you feel people need more income, address that problem. If you think we need some way to rate people, address THAT problem. But recombining them, as we've tried and abandoned already, is a backward step into murky water.

I don't feel that people need more income. The point of this is not to give people more income, it's to provide a real tangible feedback for constructive behaviour, meaningful rewards for productive work. When it was killed, people predicted that it would make things worse. And look, it has.
It should never have been abandoned. It worked well when it was used as tips. Not so well when ludicrous levels of ratings gave ludicrous rewards. It should have been nerfed, not killed.

Totally agree.

People are going on about whats the point of ratings because they have been ruined by the abandonment of the negative rating. A positive rating without negative ratings also being possible is illogical and mostly useless. It's PC bull that tells no one anything for the most part.

New RL tipping rules: You leave a "chit" on the table if you get good service. The wait staff can report this to the government for a discount on their taxes. The more chits, the bigger the kickback from the government. Special awards for getting lots of chits in a short amout of time. Customers can only give a particular person three chits max, ever, and each costs a penny.

Complex, cumbersome, and since the customer doesn't spend any of their OWN money in the process (well, just a penny, but you can't even get a gumball for that anymore), leaving a chit is no big deal. You'll either leave all three or none. And there's no incentive for the wait staff to keep up the same level of service, since once given their allotment of chits from that customer, they'll never get any more.

To keep the chits from being tossed out so casually, the governement increases the cost to leave one to 25 cents, but this makes little difference. So they stop providing the discount on taxes (it was costing the government too much, anyway). But now the chits are pretty meaningless. At the higher cost, fewer chits are given. The "in for a penny, in for a pound" effect is amplified by the increased cost however, making those who are willing to give ANY chits give all three at once still.

Now the wait staff have only one thing to do with their chits, and that's display how many they have to show how good they are. But it turns out that quantity is equal to quantity in this case. Register clerks at McDonalds see so many more customers, they get about as many chits as the best employees at 5 star restaurants. So even the relative number of chits is worthless as an indicator of quality.



RL world analogues aside, how about this:

1. "Rate" becomes "Tip"
   
2. You choose how much to tip in each/any of the three categories
   
3. The money goes straight to the person, no government involvement
   
4. How many tips recieved for each category is recorded and is on display for all to see
   
5. L$ amount received for each category is recorded and is on display for all to see
   

Solves:

1. Appreciated people get hard L$ to show how much they are appreciated
   
2. Profile readers can see Quantity (# of tips given)...
   
3. ...and Quality (total L$ given) as discreet elements
   

This may sound good, no? No. How about "you tip me L$1,000,000... I tip you L$1,000,000... And we both come out smelling like roses"? Think you can stop that? No. "A tips B. B tips C. C tips D. D tips A." Can't stop that - it might be legit. After 7 steps, everyone knows everyone anyway, so all you need is a group of 7 people to "pass the tip jar" to rack up high scores in Quality and Quantity.

The only true solution is to drop the Q&Q tracking alltogether, and just give people money.



If you want tips, just give people L$.
If you want ratings, come up with a rating system that doesnt' involve money.
Because any rating system with money is a money system with ratings.


This isn't a big deal for me, my writing style just comes off as a tad stuffy at times, I think. I'm saying all this with a smile and an open mind. ]

I completely agree. The "Tip" system in SWG actually worked fairly well for precisely the reasons you described, and since it's not adding new money out of the air, it's a very eloquent solution.


As for the whole "ratings on profile page" thing, I personally don't think negative ratings "worked." The only times I ever received negs were by people not willing to talk something out or just felt like being pricks with a basic account.


A perfect example of the handful I received: "Hey, you ripped me off. I paid the game L$25, but it sez L$1 to start. I want my money back!" *Neg Rate*

Of course, I happily returned his money from his folley. And, you guessed it, I never had the rating removed. This was when the cost was L$1.

We have the ability to pay people, but not to send them a message with the payment.

We should be able to make a payment with a message, just for functional reasons like telling them "Hey, this is the twenty I owe you, don't forget to take it off my tab.".

With the ability to pay someone and include a message, we could have an appreciation gift custom.

When you see a great build, give those responsible a small payment and note saying what it is for. Same for a good job of event hosting, responding to questions in the forums, teaching, scripting, whatever.

If you feel the same way the next time you give them another small token of appreciantion.

When you get bored with it you could stop giving the payments.

Amounts would be chosen by individuals but converging on an amount smalll enough that most anyone could give one but not so big that people would think they should give it back when they get a payment.

In order to let those with the least Lindens join in the appreciation custom a one linden payment would need to be considered ok.

A range of 1 to 5 for normally good stuff, maybe 10 lindens for something great, seems about right.

As long as it shows in the chat log, Suezanne.

Blue Box: Random Guy paid you L$1 - "Screw you, prick!"

You can drop everything and just give money, but then you hit the psychological barrier that people don't like to "just give money". That's why there's dwell and developer's bonuses, to simulate the money they'd spend (which is the same as giving, since they'd be buying things they don't actually need... like avatar food) if they were spending money while they hang around doing other stuff.

These "ratings" or "tips" would be the same thing.

And what's the problem with that?

Another possibility... base dwell on income (on a curve), and have some percentage of the dwell go to the 10 lowest income people on the land in the period the dwell was earned. that'd simulate reality too, but it'd mean Anshe would have to hire a receptionist and armed guards if the curve wasn't nerfed enough.