Author
|
Topic: New Meridion feature: Activity Report (Read 8440 times) |
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.78
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
  
|
 |
New Meridion feature: Activity Report
« on: 2006-10-17 15:09:06 » |
 |
This new feature is available from the Meridion Reputations page. Click on any value in the activity column to generate an Activity Report for that user.
The activity level feature was requested by users (mostly rhino) to automatically adjust influence based on how active the member is in the community. (Before this was added we relied on the users to monitor activity levels and adjust ratings appropriately. This proved to be too much effort for Meridion users.)
As you can see from the Activity Report the last 24 months of activity is taken into account when calculating the activity level. Actually I use 30-day periods rather than calendar months. The number of BBS posts are tracked along with the number of lines sent to the #virus IRC channel. One BBS post is equivalent to 100 IRC lines.
Activity in previous months is discounted at a rate of 70.7% (the root of one half) so that recent activity counts for more. In other words posting 5 messages to the BBS (and nothing previous) is equivalent to posting 20 messages to the BBS 2 months ago (and nothing before or since). Another way to look at this discounting effect is if a member drops out completely their influence will decay at a rate of 50% every two months until they come back or they disappear completely.
The activity level is calculated as the log (base 2) of the net discounted activity. This means that if someone has an activity level of 3 they are twice as active as someone with a level of 2, and four times as active as someone with a level of 1 (more or less, technically 1 is added before taking the log so that zero activity results in a level of 0).
The activity level is a direct multiplier on the influence value which is used to calculate equity (fraction of total influence). Say two members had exactly the same reputation (computed from ratings) but one had an activity level of 2 and the other 3. The latter would have 50% more influence (3/2) because they are twice as active (recall a difference of 1 in the level corresponds to a factor of 2 in the underlying activity).
Comments and suggestions welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4289
Reputation: 8.79
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:New Meridion feature: Activity Report
« Reply #1 on: 2006-10-18 01:26:37 » |
|
Comments:
Very nice. Thank you. Very much.
Kind Regards
Hermit
Suggestions:
Browsing the chat logs, I notice a lot of housekeeping activity introduced by the various bots (arrived/left etc). Perhaps, if you are not already doing this, the "line counter" should ignore bot activity other than speech in order to minimize the side effect of "whirling dervish" activities being rewarded.
It would be nice to have a "document scoring device" like the thumbs up/thumbs down that used to exist, only more granular, that would allow the weight of posts to be modified.
This would be more useful if it also assigned "importance" or even better "importance" and "significance" (the difference is largely based on the duration of relevance). A possible method might involve:
1 Each member has two fields to score the relative importance of each post as perceived by the author for the short term and for the long term (or forever).
2 An additional two controls similar to the above are provided for everyone to use.
3 In each case, one control adjusts the relative ranking of the significance of the post within the ranks of the current posts (either for the last n days (single slot system) or for the current period (multiple slot system), e.g. by month)), the second does the same thing either in terms of a period (perhaps a year) or perhaps on an open ended basis (i.e. for as long as the system operates).
4 The total of the relative scores allocated for each category by the author will always be normalized to 100 unless no posts have been written in which case it will be 0.
5 Each post, as made, is allocated the average significance as allocated by that member, adjusted by a factor that represents the equity of the poster.
6 The member then optionally establishes their perception of the significance of their post by incrementing or decrementing its relative value, perhaps by clicking on a +/- control and showing the current post in one color over a graph showing all that author's other posts in a different color.
7 The initial long and short term significance of a post in the global sense would be based on the equity of the poster, adjusted by the significance set by the poster, but can be adjusted by the poster, within the ability of that user to set the importance, i.e. they can reduce the importance to "less important than anything else, but cannot increase it above their equity level.
8 Other raters would see the authors ranking, and could adjust the significance of the post by adding or subtracting their equity from the significance established by the system, the author, and their previous ratings of the item.
9 The rankings would be shown alongside each post. For example, consider "." as showing the ranking of previous posts and "|" as showing the ranking of a current post. Then a suitable control might look something like this:
- . . . . .... | ... .. . ..+ : Author's ranking of significance in the long term
- . . . . .... ... ..|. ..+ : Author's ranking of significance in the short term
- ... ... .. .... .| ...... . .+ : Community allocation of short term significance
- ... ... .. ....| ....... .. .+ : Community allocation of aeternal significance
10 While members would see the site organized anyway they wanted, visitors could trivially be shown a representative slice with a weighting towards the auto-selecting best of...
11 Instead of "100 IRC lines" we could then say that the value of a post is perhaps 0 to 100 lines worth, with the value determined by relative significance in the period of interest.
12 If implemented, I would suggest that the ranking information - and perhaps the needed graphical representations, should be produced at the time of altering the value and stored with the actual post in order to minimize the database load of adding this system.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4289
Reputation: 8.79
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:New Meridion feature: Activity Report
« Reply #2 on: 2006-11-02 10:37:21 » |
|
Closing the Feedback Loop
Reward System: Posts Per Day
If member reputation is positive (i.e. 6 or more), then no limit.
If member reputation is negative or neutral then reputation is between 1 and 6
Make number of posts = ++int(reputation) i.e. the lowest rank possible would still be able to make 2 posts per day. The vast majority of members will not ever run into the the limit.
For those few posters not members of Meridion, the posting limit should be lower than the lowest ranking on Meridion, i.e. 1 post per day.
So, taking a concrete example, Salamantis (Joe Dees' alias), which is not a member of Meridion, will be able to make 1 post per day. Joe Dees, currently the lowest ranked member of Meridion would be able to make 3 posts per day (which he would have to choose from carefully to prevent his posting limit from dropping, but which, should he choose to adapt his behavior would probably increase).
Unless a reputable member of Meridion can confirm the separate existence of a member, e.g. Tywick/LadyZ , Hermit/Hermitess, Lucifer/Se7en, IP addresses which are the same in the last octet as others produced in 24 hours should be considered the same entity for posting purposes. This last may be easily handled via a flag on the member record if it ever becomes an issue (as Hermitess, Se7en and LadyZ are not active and as they and their consorts have reputations greater than 6, use of a simple IP address will not materially affect anyone for now).
Due to the last, Joe Dees/Salamantis would have a combined posting level of 3 posts per day unless his reputation changes.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
|
Logged
