Caedes

Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc.

Discussion Board -> Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc. -> Reward systems

Reward systems

Romane
03/05/05 11:50 AM GMT
Good morning

During a most interesting discussion on the quality of images, the use of reward systems was brought up. A request was made that I post my thoughts on this in a separate thread. I work on the principle that once an idea has been voiced, it is no longer the property of the person who spoke but the property of everyone, free to be dissected, analysed, broken apart and reassembled in another form if needed. So feel free. To get the full context, just pop over to "The Old Classics".

To quote my words in the other thread:

~~~
As for the point made by Caedes, I can only say what you already know - there are no easy answers. Caedes is only one place that is struggling with similar questions. Klas made a good point in addition to that about snapshot policy - the reward system. Perhaps an official reward system could be put in place for those that consistently leave quality comments on images, but this may (ok, ok, will) be unweildy in practice. Another variation on this could be to leave positive feedback on the profile of a person when it is seen that they have given good feedback to the artist, and any of us can do that - a way of encouraging quality comments. Perhaps something like "I read your comments on such and such an image. I found these well structured and helpful to, not only the artist who contributed the image but also to others who view this image. Keep up the good work." This might then result in less glowing comments appearing on poor quality images.
~~~

The floor is open <theatrical passage of hand across front till arm extended to right, palm upmost, indicating direction of floor>
0∈ [?]
Success is found by having the courage to let go of known shores.

Comments

Post a Comment  -  Subscribe to this discussion
kjh000
03/05/05 12:07 AM GMT
*Getting the scalpel.* ^_^
0∈ [?]
mesmerized
03/05/05 12:51 AM GMT
I like your approach and ideas, Romane..:Pat..
0∈ [?]
"What's the earth with all its' art, verse, music, worth--Compared with LOVE, found, gained, and kept?" (Robert Browning)
::RobNevin
03/05/05 2:12 PM GMT
Our friends at Microsoft (*cough*) have an interesting approach concerning information provided on their web based help services. Once information is conveyed they ask the reader to comment. In essence "was this information useful for you". From this they have the ability to assess the value of the information provided, to the individual and to the mass. Now .. what they do with this information is another thread. *wink*

Following the Romane’s notion of a reward system I promote the following for an example using Romane and me for illustration:

I post an image and Romane reviews it and provides me with feedback. I see the feedback as valuable (goodness knows I need the help!). What if I was able to click a box next to Romane's comment to indicate "This comment was constructive"? The 'vote' in this case would be a private dialogue between the site and I...but could increment a counter of "constructive comments" on Romane's personal page (User Information). If viewed properly, it could be seen as a reward to Romane for leaving comments that, in the eyes of the people, were constructive. The ability to post specific comments remains if more details or thanks are required.

This could be seen as a honor badge to recognize those who are willing to spend the time to help another. We all know those whose names would already have earned high scores. Those people are due their rewards. Many have and continue to help me.

Everyone has the opportunity to earn rewards equally.

The definition of constructive can be left to the discretion of the person interpreting the comment. It either was .. or not.

I quickly acknowledge that there are faults in the idea. It is as strong or weak as the current image voting schema (for example, of those images of mine that people download, on average only 34% receive votes). But it is MORE information that is currently available and could be an equitable way to acknowledge the contributions of many.

Thoughts?


Rob
*places a coin upon the outstretched palm, with gratitude*
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
+Samatar
03/05/05 11:04 PM GMT
Rob: In answer to your first question, if Microsoft receive a response that said the information was useful, they do a quick review to remedy the situation.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
::RobNevin
03/06/05 3:07 AM GMT
Sam: Tooo funny! (and likely accurate)
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
kjh000
03/06/05 5:20 PM GMT
I'm trying to think of a good thing to say regarding in this question. I can't come up with anything revolutionary right now... ^_^ I don't usually do that either so it's like it should be I guess. The only thing that comes into mind is that it seems to be tricky to implement such a system with basically custom comments. One perhaps needs some way to vote regarding the comments instead I guess.

If that is concerned a viable solution then the question comes up what kind of votes one should be able to give. I'm feeling inclined to say only positive votes should be possible. It's not going to work out if you can say to people basically: "What you say sucks, stick your head in a bucket." (On the other hand who haven't felt the need to do this at one point or another. :P)

I tend to lean towards the idea that one should be able to see what user stands behind what vote. This is in my experience from other places not going to hold people back from giving honest ratings. I feel this about all voting but think it would be rather improper to give anonymous votes on the usability of comments. I'm not only concerned about abuse of any sort. My main reason is that I think it would give a stronger connection in the community in the form of positive feedback loops.

The idea of the system must be that one should feel encouraged to speak up and make useful comments and share the knowledge that we as a whole possess.

I was thinking a scale with no zero end in the spectrum. Like only medium to highly helpful comments could be given as a vote. I feel in some sense we already have the thread on the submission in question to give more personalized expressions on how we feel about a specially helpful comment. (Perhaps one should be able to vote on threads in the discussion boards too BTW, or it was perhaps thought like that from the beginning?)

My thought about how to do it practically is a small new chapter. ^_^ I think it's already a problem with how many times a page have to reload during the process of rating. I don't think many people feel like reloading the page more then once during a post. (And perhaps people would vote more in the "regular" voting process too if you can implement what I'm thinking about.) Perhaps it's insanely difficult to code, I don't know stuff like that at all. Couldn't you simply have multiple checking boxes (/rolldown menues) and write a comment in the same session and then simultaneously post all results into the database? If this is possible you will get a much higher compliance in the general voting too. I very much doubt people will reload every page they comment on at least three times (if I'm thinking right now) and possibly more. (In a huge thread you could feel the need to give multiple commenting votes to different people this will not happen if you need to reload for each one.)

OK, that's all folks. A candy to each and everyone that have the stamina to read my small, non-revolutionary post with a minimum of new ideas. ^_^
0∈ [?]
::RobNevin
03/06/05 8:45 PM GMT
*accepts the candy with gratitude*

Interesting ideas Klas ... and I agree that if such a system were to be implemented that it would be necessary that it all be done in one session ...without needing to reload pages. The least pain possible is the key.

I further agree that if a vote on value of the comment was to be given that it should not stray to the negative.

I offer that having a vote in degrees, however (scale of 1-5 or whatever), might introduce a problem caused by subjective voting. I might rate a comment as 1 and you might rate the same comment as a 5. The effect (if simply accumulated as a counter on the commenters user info) could skew the score making it about as valuable as Karma. *wink*

I guess we'd need to consider if we're interested in scoring the value of the suggestion OR rewarding the fact that a constructive suggestion was made.

If the former, a scale with some form of averaging could be used.
•••• [Klas] has left [52] comments for others with an average value of [4.3]

If the latter, possibly just a count of the number of times the feedback was positive.
•••• [Klas] has left [52] valuable comments for others.

I think the latter would be a better indicator ..but that's just my thought. I'm more interested in the thoughts of you and others.

0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
kjh000
03/06/05 9:49 PM GMT
Hehe... I formulated myself so badly in that last sentence that I feel forced to take the candy back. You had too many ideas. :P Sorry, I'm getting tired. You get the whole bag just for my bad mistake. ^_^

I think I agree with you about not using a vote with numeric value or any other scaling. Good call. I was just spitting out ideas. This way it would be just a box to check before submitting a vote or post.

I'm still concerned about the practical details though. (If it can't be done then there's not much use talking about it...) Could you have the box to check in each individual post of a thread? That's the only way I can think of that makes it possible to cast multiple votes in one session without the need to reload the page.

One thing concerning me as well is if one can have a quality control of these votes. I wouldn't think it was especially good if standard comments like: "Nice shot!", "Great composition!" or "Fabulous, this is your best work!" would get this kind of votes. I have a hunch such a control will not be easy to implement...
0∈ [?]
Bromios
03/06/05 10:03 PM GMT
Perhaps the author(?) of a picture could vote comments received as useful, which would give the commentator(? again) a point, and then this information would be recorded in a hidden way, so that nobody could see this. Then, the number of votes a person has for constructive comments could lend their votes (i.e. 1-10) more weight, so that their opinions matter more. This could just be brainless babbling (it is late at night GMT)...
0∈ [?]
Here the stone images Are raised, here they receive The supplication of a dead man's hand Under the twinkle of a fading star.
::RobNevin
03/06/05 11:29 PM GMT
Artist = The party posting the image
Writer = The party leaving the comments

In essence I think that beside each comment left on a posting, there could be a box provided that the Artist could check if the comment was valuable. If the comment was not valuable, it would be left blank. If checked, the Writer would gain one point in their "I'm a great person and I leave helpful comments" counter on their User Information page. Such would be the reward to honor their effort. Something of greater value than Karma as it would be rewarded to the Writer by the Artist.

Quality control would remain an issue but the simpler it is ...the less likely it is to be misunderstood/misused.

In the end, within this line of thinking, someone 'could' vote the comment as 'valuable' for a comment like "Nice shot", "Great Composition" or "Fabulous, this is your best work" but even if they did ... it would be just one persons vote for the Writer ..not everyone’s.

Logistically .. if we can narrow this to an exact idea (still looking for more feedback folks) we can ask the Wizard Caedes to comment.

2cents worth.


0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
kjh000
03/06/05 11:38 PM GMT
I'm out of pennies now. :P (And candy.)
0∈ [?]
::RobNevin
03/06/05 11:43 PM GMT
*lights a fire to send a signal to Caedes for comment*
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
noobguy
03/07/05 3:40 PM GMT
we have had this same conversation before, check some of the older threads (particularly ones started by me :-p)
0∈ [?]
"Then as it was, Then again it will be. An' though the course may change sometimes, Rivers always reach the sea."
::RobNevin
03/07/05 5:06 PM GMT
Did the past discussions reach the same conclusions?
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
kjh000
03/12/05 9:38 PM GMT
I'm not sure... I guess they eventually were just as discontinued though. ^_^
0∈ [?]
::RobNevin
03/12/05 10:58 PM GMT
I read the history on Constructive Karma. Good suggestions made but no resolution evident. It seems that that discussion (now several months old), though full of excellent thinking, didn't resolve.

I'm not sure what "we have had this same discussion before" might mean.

Did the discussions of history include the parties in this discussion? I

Did the discussion of reference lead to a resolution or a conclusion or was it just started and abandoned? Was there a goal?

Ideas that move this discussion thread forward are welcomed and encouraged.
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
noobguy
03/15/05 6:03 PM GMT
Actually we've had a similar several times, Constructive Karma being one of them. Also more uploads per day or week was suggested as a reward, we found other sites where rating comments was implemented succesfully and analysed them, etc etc. I dont think any of those discussion were followed up on, maybe you could *bump one
0∈ [?]
"Then as it was, Then again it will be. An' though the course may change sometimes, Rivers always reach the sea."
::RobNevin
03/17/05 11:00 PM GMT
If they care, they will come. If the title "reward systems" doesn't attract interest, it doesn't exist. But, that's just an opinion and what do I know?

Wait.... don't answer that!


R
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
Romane
03/18/05 1:56 PM GMT
*Not answering* :)
0∈ [?]
Success is found by having the courage to let go of known shores.
scionlord
03/18/05 2:06 PM GMT
*twiddles*
0∈ [?]
'Study the past, if you would divine the future.' - Confucius ................. Pieces to Ponder : Earache , Vortex 3 , Blueness
+tbob
03/18/05 7:01 PM GMT
The main reason some people don't give honest feedback is because it don't pay to,for instance you leave a negative comment to the wrong users and they blow up and start complaining and in some instances cause problems.Same with the votes if an images gets low votes people swear the fix is in or the c-index is suddenly broke for them or their image.So I guess my question would be how is rewards going to solve these problem?I agree there needs to be more participation on the downloaders side of the scale,but the people that upload stuff need to understand that if an image that they like or think is good may not get the response that they want and my get deleted from the site.When I say more downloader participation I mean across the site not just on the authors you like or are friends with,I think that sort of thing is worse than no comments at all.I have a whole hard drive full of stuff that I like allot and it took me quite a while to make that received low votes and little or no comments.Besides helping someone to become better at something I would think is a pretty great reward in itself.
0∈ [?]
::RobNevin
03/18/05 8:06 PM GMT
This thread deals with the topic or reward systems. A system intended to honor or recognize those on the site who provide constructive feedback to other posters.

If you leave negative feedback (for example 'This image sucks') you get what you deserve. Most people on the site are adults and would simply let such comments roll or consider the source.

This thread deals with rewarding behaviors that drive the mission of the site forward. The reward system (if any) will not punish nor correct the negative contributions nor negative aspects of the site. There is no single solution, but a series of small corrections can bring improvement. The goal of the discussion is to bring improvement.

A reward system (however described) could bring energy to those who are interested in seeing the site quality improve. It could further attract and retain others of the same mind, and provide visual incentive to participate in a manner that is constructive not destructive. ....or such is the intention.

Some people are self motivating, most are motivated by encouragement. The question open is how to we encourage positive behaviors and is a reward system the correct way? If so, how should it be structured or how can it be done?

Some ideas have been expressed that are concrete. Will they work, are there others that could work better?

There are other threads dealing with discussions on positive vs. negative critiques.
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
+tbob
03/18/05 9:03 PM GMT
The point I was trying to make is some users if you leave lets say a comment like "you know I think that picture needs so and so done to it" they blow up.These users view anything that isn't a pat on the back saying "you are the greatest" as a negative comment.I myself have often pondered a rewards system but haven't really ever been able to think of something that would really motivate the users that only download,after all I think those are the users that need to do more.I mean its pretty easy to vote and leave a comment yet it seldom happens,I would also venture to say if you took away all the authors usual audience those stats would drop allot lower than they are now.I guess the question I have is why do you guys feel that the a rewards system will generate more user participation?
0∈ [?]
Romane
03/18/05 9:46 PM GMT
Good morning

Have been following this thread with a great deal of interest, watching ideas cross the floor.

tbob made the point about taking away an author's usual audience. I agree. In an email to a friend only two days ago, I had reason to make this comparison. I will preserve their anonymity here and have edited out what is irrelevant to this thread:

"Something that did stand out to me, and was a good healthy reality check for me, is the number of people who comment/vote compared to the number of people who pass through that place. Just looking at tonight's figures, we read "5713 users active today" while the top of the home page states "3588 regular members". Of these, we see feedback from how many? See active regular involvement by how many? What, two dozen, three dozen? Maybe even four dozen? Yet looking at the number of times an image is downloaded does not match to the number of people that we see posting on our pages. I check my Caedes Control every day, not to look at the c-Index but to look at the number of views and number of downloads, which gives me a better indication of how well liked an image is...

As an example, if we look at your image as of last night (the figures will have changed tonight) "<name of image>". It has been viewed 173 times, been downloaded 122 times (that is, 70.5% of people who have looked at it have downloaded it), but only 22 people have voted, and only 11 people have left comments."

Um, just letting you know that haven't abandoned the thread, but don't have any answers better or different than those already given.

Enjoy your day

Romane
0∈ [?]
Success is found by having the courage to let go of known shores.
::RobNevin
03/18/05 9:56 PM GMT
Tbob: We agree.

I think a reward system would reward those who leave constructive (helpful) comments. If they are encouraged to leave constructive comments, they will leave more constructive comments. Now .. be careful reading this. By constructive comment I don't mean fluff. The reward system is a means to recognize and reward those who are doing more for the site than simply posting (or worse) simply downloading images.

If a constructive comment is accurate (say a unsharp adjustment is suggested), and the poster (photographer/artist) benefits from the suggestion, their work improves. If their work improves they produce better images.

If each person improves by 10% (an arbitrary #) through constructive critique the net effect is a better product on the site. As the standards of the site improves, it attracts more and more people drawn by the 'brand' of being on Caedes. The overall standard increases and the volume of good images improves.

Or .. we could just leave it alone and trust that those who are contributing to the improvement of the site will continue. By and large they have already. It just makes you wonder, however, what 'more' might be available with a pat on the back.



0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
*caedes
03/18/05 11:17 PM GMT
I am of the opinion that it is useless to be concerned about the number of people who visit the website only to download images (not to comment or vote). Granted it is a large number as compared to the number of really active people on the site, however I think that it is a very common trend on the internet for participation to fall off extremely rapidly as more 'work' is required of the visitor. So it goes like 6000 users per day -> 3000 regular members -> 300 commenters -> 20 Cadre members -> 10 Moderators -> 1 caedes. It would be unrealistic to expect 80% of the visitors to register a username and comment on an image. Just think about how many websites you've ditched because they require a login. I think that the difference is that caedes.net actually keeps track of the number of transient visitors. On most other websites you wouldn't even know that they exist. I am however, happy that they come by because they provide reveue for the site (google ads) if nothing else.
0∈ [?]
-caedes
kjh000
03/18/05 11:38 PM GMT
Sounds ok caedes. I understand that's all one could ask for.

Rob. Taking a slightly different turn in my argumentation... A prob in your senario... If a constructive critique is accurate (say the image is full of artefacts and the shot is improperly exposed) and the artist doesn't care. Their work does not improve. They claim to be happy not to do anything about it. What is the proper thing to do here? Some artists actively try to make constructive critique into a bad thing... What does one do in such a case?
0∈ [?]
::RobNevin
03/18/05 11:42 PM GMT
My thinking within this thread does not concern itself with the people who vote, nor with those who do not comment. The reward system would be a means for those who posted images, and received comments that they felt were helpful, to offer a 'reward' to the party making the constructive suggestion. These rewards would accrue to the credit of the commenter.

This would not be required and would not have any affect on those who breeze into the site to scarf wallpapers as a) they are not contributors of images b) are disinclined to leave comments.

My thinking is to support those active contributors and in particular to reward those who really make a difference in supporting 'trainees" like me, helping me improve my works.

I am not looking for more comments on an image. I am not looking for an increase in the number of times an image gets voted. In the context of this thread, I'm interested only in supporting those who support the improvement of quality of the site.

Hope this makes sense.
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
kjh000
03/18/05 11:44 PM GMT
Sure it does. Most appropriate I think. ;)
0∈ [?]
::RobNevin
03/19/05 12:04 AM GMT
Klas, to your question. We've all seen this. I have offered a gentle suggestion to one party who posted something that was just SHRIEKING with an error. To the polite suggestion came the response "I like it like that". So, for me, it reshaped my willingness to offer constructive critique to that individual.

The site is full of individuals. It's like a plaque a friend of mine has on his front door. "All my friends are welcome, some when then come, some when they go".

I choose to support those who make a positive difference to the benefit of us all.
0∈ [?]
You're invited to tour my gallery ••• º¹º¹ºº¹¹º¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ºººº¹¹º¹ººº
stuffnstuff
04/16/05 1:25 AM GMT
I apologize for not reading everything, but believe me when I saw that when I move into my padded cell and they provide me a computer, it will happen. :-D

Rob requested I repeat something I posted in another thread:

"I believe that a multi-step voting system would be amazingly wonderful so that everyone could express why they like or dislike an image, yet I fully realize the reason why this wouldn't work. Nobody would take the time! Fortunately, I have just experienced a moment of inspiration (or idiocy, you tell me). Have the voting procedure be as straight forward and easy as Rob's suggestion, but have an optional link for extensive voting with a reward system of 1 karma everytime you vote in the detailed mode."

(This "extended vote" would have sub-categories perhaps for creativity, artistic appeal, effort, suaveness, clarity, content, advertisement quality, and similarity in appearance to manitees.)

Perhaps there should be something additional to karma, very similar to it in some aspects, yet very different in others. Perhaps karma should stay as it is as one point for every comment, and "massive" after 1,000 (or even better after 1,500 or 2,500 so we can tell who the exceptionally experienced ones are), but an additional point value system should be created to correspond and compliment the karma, and this could have additional rewards (following either the ratings on your comments or detailed votes or an odd concoction of both).

I personallly like all these ideas so far because staticstics make everything appear official, important, and ever so much cooler. Let me know what you think. :-)
0∈ [?]
-those who hit rock bottom are too concerned with self pity to realize that they are lying on an anvil- Psalm 66:10, Job 10:8

Leave a comment (registration required):

Subject: