 Posted 6/20/2007 1:24:43 PM
|
|
|
|
I would like communicate to everyone here how important the task of building and maintaining the integrity of the system that grants ratings and awards is to the admin of this site. I want to give everyone an understanding of the kind of research that I do with the data that is recorded as you vote by providing a real example of a situation that happened today.
First, to clear up some confusion, it is my belief that every user's voting 'pattern' should develop into a normally distributed bell curve given enough samples. This is not to say that I believe that everyone should vote the same (if that was the case, we'd only need one voter). This is to say that a majority of your votes should be centered around your median score and as you move more extreme (towards 1 or 10) the votes should become less frequent (this should happen naturally).
With that said, an example arose today of a user who's distribution does not follow this reasoning. This user has approximately 260 votes cast as a score of 9 and approximately 400 votes cast as a score of 10. This raises a red flag for me to see the number of 10s so much higher than the number of 9s.
What I then looked for was whether these votes of 10 were concentrated among a few users (indicating unethical voting behavior) or whether these '10' votes were distributed in a reasonable fashion. In this particular case, the 400 votes of '10' were spread among 178 users with a slight concentration on a few accounts.
Next, I selected out those accounts that showed a higher concentration (one had 23 votes of 10 from this user) and looked at the individual images that received the '10' vote to see how many others they had gotten. Doing so yielded again normal results as most of those images had received scores of 10 from many other individuals (one even had 17 '10' votes).
The point here is to say:
1) The very large majority of votes cast here are well intentioned
2) Your admin works hard to protect the integrity of the system
3) You can have faith in the awards that are granted and the ratings you see on each image
You may view this spreadsheet to see the true results of this research. If the user wishes to reveal his/her identity then you may validate the findings just as I did.
Eric
DailyAwards.com
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 1:45:23 PM
|
|
|
|
| Eric - many thanks for posting this as it has helped me to understand the system in place.
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 3:25:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 3:41:36 PM
|
|
|
|
Before you modify your voting style... How about tossing me a few.
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 4:49:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 6:08:30 PM
|
|
|
|
Sorry Glynn, I was talking about the person that was investigated. LOL
To tell the truth, I rarely look at who voted on my images, I usually just look at the vote and weight. My impression is that you vote fair but tough, not brutal but you aren't going to get a freebie either. To me it it really doesn't matter.
The humorous part is that were someone to target vote me then I'm not likely to catch it which, in some sick way, is justice as they would fail to to reach their goal of pissing me off.
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 6:11:23 PM
|
|
|
|
Well that just proves it... cause when i reread it I have to assume you are masked! Too flippin' funny.
|
|
|
Posted 6/20/2007 7:17:34 PM
|
|
|
|
| Thanks for all the hard work Eric.
|
|
|
Posted 6/21/2007 7:20:57 AM
|
|
|
| | |
