What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

New Feature We're Trialing (1 Viewer)

Will you use this feature to rank threads giving them 1-5 stars?

  • Yes. Will use it a lot.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes. Will use it sometimes.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Don't really know.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No. Probably won't use it much.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No. Definitely won't use it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff
You've probably noticed some of the threads have stars. In the upper right corner of the original post, you can rate the thread from 1 to 5 stars. Basically, what you think of the thread.

I'm sort of undecided on whether I like them or not but we decided to give them a try and see how they went. Keith set it up tonight.

Let us know what you think. And yes, I'm sure this thread will have zero stars...

Thanks.

J

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this rating system is worth a shot. With the shear volume of threads, it helps to have something to tell me what may be worthy of reading/responding to.

And by the way, this thread gets zero.zero stars. :confused:

 
It would be cool if you could sort posts by stars but for now, that's not an option. Maybe in future versions of the software.

J

 
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.

 
It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out over the next few weeks... new threads being voted on offers a better sample... :goodposting:

we'll see... think positive...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
The sample size is still insignificantly small right now. We'll see how it works after more people rate. And useless is relative. There are lots of people who put a big value on kickers. Some more than a rookie like Wells. And it'll be interesting to see how the rating works. I think it will be more about the thread and how it goes than the topic. Holt is news but that's pretty much a yawner as everyone expected it. It could be a great thread or it might not be much more than reporting the news. We'll see.J
 
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
I believe that early votes for some of these threads are going to be indicative of personal feelings about the subject and not the content of the thread itself (Beanie Wells detractors or the back and forth going on in that thread may account for it's low score at the moment, however.) I think that the more people who vote the scores will average themselves out to where they belong. The rating option just came out so it's going to be screwy until people take it seriously and more people rate the threads that are being read.
 
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
Did you read the Beanie thread? The thread deserves 1-2 stars for the off topic nonsense, but there is some great content mixed in there.Maybe the rating system should be more specific. "Fantasy Content Rating"
 
Joe Bryant said:
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
The sample size is still insignificantly small right now. We'll see how it works after more people rate. And useless is relative. There are lots of people who put a big value on kickers. Some more than a rookie like Wells. And it'll be interesting to see how the rating works. I think it will be more about the thread and how it goes than the topic. Holt is news but that's pretty much a yawner as everyone expected it. It could be a great thread or it might not be much more than reporting the news. We'll see.J
Click to expand...
I agree with your general premise here that it will actually be less about rating the topic as the rating indicates but rather more about rating how the thread has gone.I guess as you look at the ratings you have to know your audience. Some like watching trainwrecks and some hate it but from my experience with consumer feedback focus groups, I'd hazard to say that those in the middle vote a whole lot less.
 
Will take some time to see how this works out, but so far not terribly useful.

I was one of the ones that asked about a rating system. Now, this may be a limitation of the software, but there's another system I've seen elsewhere that seems to work better. It's not based on a 5 star system that you have to go and click on rating and then give a star rating to. What I'm used to is a lot more basic and a lot more helpful, IMO.

Every post, both the original as well as each reply in the thread, has a green or a red button. If you like it and think it's worth noting, click green. If it's nothing special, don't click anything. If it's a terrible post, click red.

The more greens a specific thread (or more specifically, the first post in a thread), the larger the green bar next to the thread gets. Likewise for each post. Only the best threads will get lots of green. Thus, threads with a much longer green bar than others are easily noticed. Same goes for posts. Same goes for red.

Again, not sure if this is a limitation of the software, but this would work much better than just stars where even 1 or 2 votes will put up a rating that isn't helpful. With the green/red system, 1 or 2 votes only result in a minimal green bar. It really takes a lot to get noticed.

 
Along the same thinking of what I posted above, maybe a way that these stars would be a little more useful and not clutter up the board would be to have a minimum # of ratings inputted before it's actually displayed.

What makes it not good right now, IMO, is that as soon as one person votes, we're stuck with that rating for a bit. Even with 2-3 more votes, the rating isn't going to shift significantly. Then, it makes it harder to tell if it's just a newer thread with just a couple votes or a long standing thread with lots of votes.

If you set a minimum of say 15-20 rating votes until it's displayed, then you get a truer average representation of a thread rating without cluttering up the board.

 
gianmarco said:
Will take some time to see how this works out, but so far not terribly useful.

I was one of the ones that asked about a rating system. Now, this may be a limitation of the software, but there's another system I've seen elsewhere that seems to work better. It's not based on a 5 star system that you have to go and click on rating and then give a star rating to. What I'm used to is a lot more basic and a lot more helpful, IMO.

Every post, both the original as well as each reply in the thread, has a green or a red button. If you like it and think it's worth noting, click green. If it's nothing special, don't click anything. If it's a terrible post, click red.

The more greens a specific thread (or more specifically, the first post in a thread), the larger the green bar next to the thread gets. Likewise for each post. Only the best threads will get lots of green. Thus, threads with a much longer green bar than others are easily noticed. Same goes for posts. Same goes for red.

Again, not sure if this is a limitation of the software, but this would work much better than just stars where even 1 or 2 votes will put up a rating that isn't helpful. With the green/red system, 1 or 2 votes only result in a minimal green bar. It really takes a lot to get noticed.
Click to expand...
I've seen what you're talking about and would post a link to a "participating" message board but don't want to seem like I'm pimping it although I agree that it might be a more useful system then the star ratings, but I'm not sold on the rating system as a whole. Seems to be clutter for I don't know when I look at a rating (even once there are a statistically significant number of replies) whether someone is rating the topic in general or how the thread has evolved or at what point in the threads natural evolution ratings were made.IMO and generally speaking, this rating system is not really applicable to fantasy football in general for with all our different types of league, scoring and interests what might be inconsequential to most might be fascinating to me and visa-versa.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't really see the point in visable thread ratings. I will still open/not open threads based on the title of the thread.

Also, I can easily see really bad threads getting 5-star rankings- It's just the kind of thing that happens here often.

 
This is one of those things that's great in theory, but in practice doesn't work because people screw around with it or give a thread 1 or 5 stars based on something other than the thread quality. Like 1 starring any thread about the Cowboys because you hate the team...things of that nature.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
The sample size is still insignificantly small right now. We'll see how it works after more people rate. And useless is relative. There are lots of people who put a big value on kickers. Some more than a rookie like Wells. And it'll be interesting to see how the rating works. I think it will be more about the thread and how it goes than the topic. Holt is news but that's pretty much a yawner as everyone expected it. It could be a great thread or it might not be much more than reporting the news. We'll see.J
Click to expand...
I was thinking along the same lines as this guy. Is there a way to "hide" the rating until enough people actually rate the thread? (At least ten) If the first couple of raters rate ridiculously, then the purpose of the sytem is quickly and sadly thwarted.FWIW...I voted neutral on this.
 
thatguy said:
moleculo said:
this will simply clutter things up and will ultimately be worthless.
Click to expand...
This is about how I feel. I came in here today and saw the star thingies next to all the threads and said "Oh no they didn't." Not a fan.
Click to expand...
This.I'll also add that I've always just considered the page count as a "thread rating"... The more pages, clearly the more popular the thread is. The stars just strike me as pointless clutter. :hophead:
 
I think an additional poll question (or maybe a separate poll for a later date) that would provide value would be "Will you use this rating feature?" with "Yes" and "No" options.

 
Really don't like this feature at all. Adds clutter, and basically doesn't influence me at all, so what's the point? And it will likely turn into people simply voting 5 stars for their own threads and threads started by people they like or agree with and 1 star for people they don't like or don't agree with. I think this is a VERY BAD idea.

 
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
Posters like this are going to be the problem, show me any other thread on this site or any other place on the innerwebs that discuss 2009 kickers??? It is the only place to find any info on kickers and I have come back to it numerous times during FA season...Everyone knows Holt was dropped by Saint Louis, that is useless, when he gets picked up by another team, you have a relevant thread and worth 5 stars...Every thread will have supporters and detractors and everyone will have different points of view...It would be useful if you could rate poster on the content of their posts for the SP and IDP threads. Someone who adds information on a topic gets 5 stars and someone who only adds :goodposting: gets 1 star. I guarantee a poster who is rated at 1 or 2 stars can be put on your ignore list while posters who rate 3, 4 or 5 stars will get lots of looks. I think this would make for a much better option...
 
I'm going to echo the sentiment that a thread shouldn't have a rating 'till a minimum # of votes have been collected. It could be as low as a minimum of 10, but when one guy votes, and you have a 1 star thread because his post got pissed on, it's not a good representation. I really doubt we get enough participation to make this work, but it could. DEFINITELY a minimum # of votes before a thread even gets a rating though.

 
BoneYardDog said:
It would be useful if you could rate poster on the content of their posts for the SP and IDP threads. Someone who adds information on a topic gets 5 stars and someone who only adds :goodposting: gets 1 star. I guarantee a poster who is rated at 1 or 2 stars can be put on your ignore list while posters who rate 3, 4 or 5 stars will get lots of looks. I think this would make for a much better option...
Click to expand...
Very much agree, that it would be much more useful to this board to rate individual posts, and those votes turn into a poster ranking.
 
BoneYardDog said:
Avery said:
I gotta say when "The UFL kicks off in October, 2009" and "The 2009 K Thread" threads get 5 stars (sorry, Mike) and real, potential fantasy impact threads like "Torry Holt released by St. Louis" and "Beanie Wells Pro Day Discussion" get 1 and 2 stars respectively, the rating system seems pretty useless.
Click to expand...
Posters like this are going to be the problem, show me any other thread on this site or any other place on the innerwebs that discuss 2009 kickers??? It is the only place to find any info on kickers and I have come back to it numerous times during FA season...Everyone knows Holt was dropped by Saint Louis, that is useless, when he gets picked up by another team, you have a relevant thread and worth 5 stars...

Every thread will have supporters and detractors and everyone will have different points of view...

It would be useful if you could rate poster on the content of their posts for the SP and IDP threads. Someone who adds information on a topic gets 5 stars and someone who only adds :shrug: gets 1 star. I guarantee a poster who is rated at 1 or 2 stars can be put on your ignore list while posters who rate 3, 4 or 5 stars will get lots of looks. I think this would make for a much better option...
Click to expand...
Maybe my examples weren't great but I'll stand by my point that ratings will have little correlation to the value of a threads topic.Furthermore, I don't see how posters like me are the problem but you're entitled to your opinion, man.

 
I've seen these ratings on other boards & it always ends badly. It becomes a popularity thing with friends rating each other with 5 stars & people they dislike with 1 star. Doesn't matter the content of the post, it just becomes a game of popularity. Pretty soon we'll have the "please rate my post" comments & people bickering about why their post went from a 4 star to a 1 star. Takes away from the main topic & divides the posters even more.

 
Joe,

I appreciate you trying to bring new and innovative items to the boards. However, this one does not add a ton of value in my opinion. I would worry that some poster bias could deter others from wanting to read a thread solely based on the rating of the thread. They might miss out on good info.

 
mcd said:
I've seen these ratings on other boards & it always ends badly. It becomes a popularity thing with friends rating each other with 5 stars & people they dislike with 1 star. Doesn't matter the content of the post, it just becomes a game of popularity. Pretty soon we'll have the "please rate my post" comments & people bickering about why their post went from a 4 star to a 1 star. Takes away from the main topic & divides the posters even more.
Click to expand...
I can see that happening very easily too. I retract my earlier post. Rating threads, or posts is good in theory, but I'm already starting to see where this won't work.
 
Sorry, but I am totally missing the value of doing this.

What is the intended purpose? To help keep someone from reading a thread some others have judged not worth reading? Odds that all forum members agree?

What if the thread starts out great and nosedives? Do people have to keep changing their rankings?

And then there is the popularity issue mentioned.Could become a fun hobby for some after a couple of drinks.

Also could deter people from posting valuable threads because they don't want the pressure of a bad rating.

I see lots of negatives, but no positives.

 
can you change the functionality so that you only see how you rated the thread and then have a way to see all threads you rated in a sorted order?

 
What happens when a thread changes? Some threads start out fine then devolve into pissing matches. Others are seemingly innocuous but end up having good information added. But most are right in the middle.

Just looking at the first sixteen topics right now, fourteen are rated three stars. Not very helpful.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeTheMatch said:
Really don't like this feature at all. Adds clutter, and basically doesn't influence me at all, so what's the point? And it will likely turn into people simply voting 5 stars for their own threads and threads started by people they like or agree with and 1 star for people they don't like or don't agree with. I think this is a VERY BAD idea.
Click to expand...
:blackdot:
 
Christo said:
What happens when a thread changes? Some threads start out fine then devolve into pissing matches. Others are seemingly innocuous but end up having good information added. But most are right in the middle.Just looking at the first sixteen topics right now, fourteen are rated three stars. Not very helpful.
Click to expand...
This thread gets 1 star. But Christo's post deserves at least 4 stars.
 
Christo said:
What happens when a thread changes? Some threads start out fine then devolve into pissing matches. Others are seemingly innocuous but end up having good information added. But most are right in the middle.Just looking at the first sixteen topics right now, fourteen are rated three stars. Not very helpful.
Click to expand...
You can change and re-change your rating any time you want for a given thread.
 
Mystery Achiever said:
Sorry, but I am totally missing the value of doing this. What is the intended purpose? To help keep someone from reading a thread some others have judged not worth reading? Odds that all forum members agree? What if the thread starts out great and nosedives? Do people have to keep changing their rankings? And then there is the popularity issue mentioned.Could become a fun hobby for some after a couple of drinks.Also could deter people from posting valuable threads because they don't want the pressure of a bad rating. I see lots of negatives, but no positives.
Click to expand...
For people that are scanning through, it's designed to be a quick ranking so that a new user could see the threads that were deemed the best by the board. If you're here all the time, probably not much value. If it worked and people were honest with their rankings (very big "if") it could be really helpful for a person that doesn't spend a ton of time here.J
 
I'm amazed at people voting no. It's not like you have to pay attention to it. What's the problem here?

For a lot of folks it makes perfect sense. Example: I don't care much about the Oakland Raiders. Normally I won't bother clicking on any Raiders thread. That said, if I see one and it's got 5 stars and lots of discussion, it might actually cause me to click on it and read some, and I might even learn something that I never would have learned.

lol at people being so vehemently against this. It's odd.

 
Otis said:
I'm amazed at people voting no. It's not like you have to pay attention to it. What's the problem here?For a lot of folks it makes perfect sense. Example: I don't care much about the Oakland Raiders. Normally I won't bother clicking on any Raiders thread. That said, if I see one and it's got 5 stars and lots of discussion, it might actually cause me to click on it and read some, and I might even learn something that I never would have learned.lol at people being so vehemently against this. It's odd.
Click to expand...
One of the threads the currently has a 5-star rating: "Travis Henry Says He's Broke......"If this was in the FFA, ok. But it's not, it's in the SP. What possible fantasy FB benefit can I get from reading about Travis Henry's 23 kids by 15 different mothers? This is just one example, but clearly the criteria used to rate threads isn't particularly informative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
Complaints and Grievances - We're starting with Week 2 - Line 'em up!
Replies
18
Views
653
Pip's Invitation
Pip's Invitation
Simon Shepherd
NEW Rate My Team Preview - let us know what you think!
Replies
17
Views
2K
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy
Joe Bryant
  • Poll Poll
Clickbaity vs Boring Subject Lines - What do you think?
Replies
28
Views
640
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top