Official Everybody Edits Forums

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Forum Member Rating Service ratings

To avoid clutter in the original post, I'm going to be posting the ratings here.

DO NOT POST HERE TO GET YOUR NAME ON THE WAITING LIST

In order of completion:

Nou: 92
This number is probably a bit (read: loads) off, it was my first rating. Towards the end, I think I judged your posts a bit more fairly. If I redid it, you'd probably get a score of around 92 or so. Only one forum game out of all 25 posts, so that didn't play a huge role. Most of your posts were well-thought out. One thing I was disappointed to see was your lack of necessary info in some cases. Instead of just saying something, say it and tell us why you feel that way. Otherwise, excellent foruming.
Takoman02: 92
This number also may be a bit off, as my excel spreadsheet might need to be tweaked with. Generally, I found that your posts were well-thought out. It was difficult filling out the 'info' variable, since the aim of the posts were different each time. Sometimes, your posts were short, and others I would've liked a bit more info. It'd be good if, again, you just told us why you don't think [idea] would work, or what made [level] fun.
MRBOOGAWESOME: 75
Your posts were really dragged down only by two things, the first being the fact that you hardly take the time to spell correctly, punctuate your sentences, or capitalize letters. Your grammar is good most times, but you don't capitalize and punctuate, or spell. Your score, if calculated without spelling mistakes AT ALL, would've been a 73. Not much higher, but it still helps, and that brings me to the next thing, your information provided. You didn't provide enough info at times to even understand what you were trying to get across, and at other times, like tako, you didn't tell us why you didn't think the level was impressive, or the idea was bad/good. Mainly work on your spelling, and then your general post rating will go up as well (your lack of punctuation did affect the general rating, because it made it hard to read).
Fir3Fli3: 89
If you hadn't have played those 3 forum games that happened to be some that I picked, your rating would've been higher. I wouldn't consider you a bad forumer, though, for a few reasons. One, this is a pretty damn good score. Higher than I got in Tako's thread, anyway, but I played lots of forum games then. Two, it was really just bad luck that those three forum games, out of (probable) loads of good posts that could've been picked. Changing the forum games, assuming those posts would've gotten, say, an 85 in a and b, your score would've been 93. Give yourself a pat on the back, because I feel that's the score you deserve.
Deadlord: 77
I think the main amount of points taken off was from forum games (4 x 1.4 = 5.6 points off). Also, you lack depth in your posts sometimes. It's generally just because you say 'This looks fun' or 'I like this', you don't go into detail. To get into, say, the 81-90 range, go into more depth with what you're saying. Analyze your statement, and ask yourself 'What can I do to make this feeling more understandable?' Although your grammar wasn't a big source of point detraction, I'd look into fixing that as well.
Gamer1120: 82
Your main problem was forum games. I know it's a bit cruel of me to have forum games subtract 1.4 points and another ~2 points per forum game (3.4 points), but that's life. You can still play forum games, but play the ones that require you to make a well-thought out post. This'll likely give you back that 2 points, or at least part of it. Another issue you had is with your info presented. Along with the ones that were really low (30s), your general rating was low, too, because they were either 1-2 word posts, or they didn't provide us with anything to consider. One main factor that almost all people on this list are missing is info provided. It can range from not telling us why you felt a certain way to not providing us with a call to action. With that being said, you still managed to get a great-ish score. I sure thought you were gonna get higher after reading some of your posts, I guess it was just your luck (or lack thereof) with the forum games.
Chewy: 87
Not entirely sure what happened here. I think what it was is that, early on, I was counting posts in which you were being a mod and nothing else as a low score, so you probably deserve to be in the next category. Nothing much I can advise you to do, except keep doing what you're doing. Just for crap and giggles, I changed your rep from giving you a bonus of 0 to... what it is now. The new score was 81. Not much of a difference, and it'd be in the same category :/
Panic: 91
Excellent work! The only complaint I have about you is that you occasionally write insanely short/meaningless posts, and you don't provide information about your posts. Two posts were just lists of others' suggestions that you had copied/pasted and wrote short sayings about, something I'd hardly call original. Work on explaining yourself more and this score will go up.
BEE: 93
Your posts were very well thought out. The only thing I noticed was the occasional short post, but they were long enough to justify a rating of over 75 for each category. Keep doing what you're doing, just make... longer posts, occasionally.
RPGmaster2000: 100
You are my idol. No, seriously. [joke]I printed out that picture of you, and I wake up seeing it hovering above me.[/joke]
On-topic: You're probably one of the best people I've reviewed. All of your posts were well-thought-out and on-topic. I counted all the 'RPG is being a mod' posts as 100/100s, since I'm too lazy to go find moar posts, and they generally were good posts, and they did provide all information necessary. Keep doing what you're doing
Pyromaniac: 91
You're very lucky to have made it into this category, you were .8 points away from being a 90 . I was a little disappointed with your spelling, and there was the occasional short post, but the other posts were generally alright. I may have been a bit liberal with the points when it came to your short posts, but there's nothing to be done about that now.
BillyP: 90
Your posts were mostly good, but some of them were short. You really have no problem with explaining yourself, just work on the post length and you'll be fine. If you really want to improve the rating, you may want to explain yourself better. You did explain yourself most always, but it wasn't always satisfactory. In any case, good work.
Kaosslasher: 77
The cause of this was probably the fact that almost half your posts were in forum games, and they were short forum games. The other posts had many misspellings and didn't exactly explain what you were trying to say, or were just short in general. Work on improving your post length. Another thing I noticed was that some posts were just nonsense, or didn't relate to the thread.
KRAZYMAN50: 91
This is the part where I learn that I'm becoming more and more lenient with my post ratings. Nothing against you, but I know I was way more impressed with Tako and nou's posts, yet you barely got a lower ranking. One thing I noticed with you is that you make short posts sometimes. You also fail to provide information that isn't necessarily needed, but would be desired in some situations.
NikK: 88
You rated yourself, which means I haz no reason.
Bobithan: 87
You know, you're insanely freaking lucky that the non-forum game posts were exceptional, and some of the forum game posts warranted more than 50/50. SIX FORUM GAMES. The most ever. You're a god to have had that many forum game posts and still get this high of a rating. I was extremely impressed with the amount of information you provided, and rarely felt that you should've given more. One thing I'd change about you is the fact that you have short sentences and only have 2-3 sentences a post. While this didn't hurt your info rating, it did hurt the general post rating.
Supadorf24: 82
Well, you had no spelling mistakes in all the 25 posts I saw. 0 spelling mistakes. That probably helped a lot in your score. Most of the posts were good and gave enough information. You had some forum games, which probably got your score down. Keep going like this, try to do more good posts, and less one-sentence posts, which don't give out much info. and aren't very useful, and you'll be a professional forum member. [-NikK]
D-rock2308: 79
Once again, SIX FORUM GAMES. Not once again for you, but once again for this entire thing. SIX. You're lucky your rating isn't lower. Aside from the forum games (most of which were short and meaningless, but that's not your fault), your posts were occasionally VERY VERY short, sometimes to the point of being spam (One post was just " :/ ". That got a 50 in general rating). Others just said "It wouldn't work" or "I didn't like this". This is the biggest problem with you forumers, why didn't you like that? That already brings rating up around 5-10 points. Solutions to the problem generally net you a 100 in that area. I may need to make a SEPERATE topic about this just for tips on how to get max rating.
Zoey2070: 98
One forum game, and that's only technical (I felt it deserved to be treated as a forum game). Your posts were all obviously thought out, and posting better posts rather than having loads of posts obviously helped you here. I'd give you the title of 'best forum member' out of all those rated here, because you have the highest legitimate rating (RPG's was clouded with 100/100s for being a mod). Let's also congratulate Zoey on being the first ever to get a post rating of over 100 for making me lol immensely.
EEguy: 88
Your posts were impressive in some parts, and disappointing in others. You definitely lost points to the fact that you didn't offer solutions to a problem when a problem arose, or point out why it wasn't needed or didn't work. Also, you had a few forum games in there (4). There was one (roll your head on the keyboard for 5 seconds). Needless to say, the rating wasn't immensely high there. Anywho, improve your corrections, make your posts longer, and try not to play useless forum games. That's not to say "DUN'T PLAY ANY FORUM GAMES EVAR", but stay away from the pointless ones. The ones that make you think (or at least do something) are a lot more fun in my opinion.
jeremifier: 74
You played NINE FORUM GAMES. Holy crap, I have no idea why your rating isn't somewhere closer to 50. On top of that, you broke a rule in one of your posts (which was a pointless post anhow), and you had 4 really short posts. Also, you started a forum game but didn't play it (in the first post), which got you a lower rating than 50, even, and you went off-topic once or twice. My advice to you, first of all, is to stop playing so many forum games. At least half the first page was cluttered with them. Pick 2-3 forum games to play and only play those 2-3 forum games. It'll reduce your chances of having one picked, while you'll still get to play your forum games. Cheerio.

Chimi: 91
You had some really good posts, and you barely played any forum games (only two), and one was a joke (not sure of the title, but the aim was to not read the original post). A few of your posts were really short, which is a killer, since it detracts from info provided and general post rating, effectively doubling the points you lose on those. I'd like you to try and make your posts longer or end your posts with 'I don't think there's much I could add', or at least make it clear that you can't think of anything else ('it's perfect', 'I love it', etc.). It may sound ridiculous (even I think so, and I'm suggesting it), but... I just don't know. Anyway, this is a high rating, good work, etc.

Monstar43: 82
Just to clear something up, first of all, you must put a space after every single comma and every single end punctuation mark. Periods, exclamation points, question marks, all of them. You lost nearly 2 points because of all of them. Second of all, please do not mini-mod, and especially don't mini-mod while not contributing to the topic, which leads to one-sentence posts. While we're on the topic of one-sentence posts, you had a lot of them. 6, to be exact. Third of all, don't play so many forum games. You had 4 forum games that were actually in the section, and 2 others that I deemed close enough to be forum games. Fix all of that and you may find your rating raised quite a bit next time you apply (if you do)

Zoidy?: 65
Well, to start off, you had 14 forum games. I think that in itself solves it. Holy crap bro, chill out with the gaems. I know you can't really get them off the list now, but try not to post in any new forum games for the next 1000 threads you post in. I'm not joking, no more forum games for 1000 threads. Over half of the selected posts were forum games, and I don't think that's a coincidence. I saw whole areas full of clusters of 7, maybe 8 games. Chill with them. Also, you need to try and spell things correctly, as well as use proper punctuation.

Brawler700: 78
You had 4 forum games, to begin this. Without them, I could've seen a score of perhaps 82+. Aside from that, you minimodded twice or thrice, and I deduct points for only doing that, perhaps 5 or 10 for doing that along with other posts. Without the minimodding, I could see an increase of 3-4 points. You also had 131 spelling/grammar mistakes overall, which took away 5 whole points from your score. Capitalize your sentences, capitalize I (especially this one), seperate lists with commas, and end all sentences with the proper punctuation mark.

Different55: 109
Finally, the one we've all been waiting for!
DAMNIT, YOU DIDN'T GET THE DIFFERENT55 RATING.
Do you want to know what held off those extra .31 points you needed? Your 27 -reps. Assuming you hadn't had them, do you know what you'd have gotten? 110. ONE HUNDRED AND MOTHERFREAKING TEN. Anyway, there's no point in ranting, here. You did great, bro. Generally, all of your posts were perfect. Of course, posts where you were being a mod got 100/100, but that's semi-irrelevant. Congratz on getting the highest rating ever! Also, you were the second to get a rating of 110 in the general post rating (for one post), for also making me lol immensely. Come back when you have more reps and we'll see about getting you that ultra rating...
EDIT: Different55 is now an extremely lucky different55, according to my rate-o-meter!

wezza: 88
You started out great, but then it went a little downhill. You were making low 80s for not specifying things and only stating your opinion and not providing that much info. You also played a couple forum games, which was quite a deduction. Throughout the whole thing, you lost 2 points for spelling and grammar errors, namely capitalizing the first letters of your sentences and not knowing where/where not to put commas.

Cyclopsicle: 85
I really can't attribute your low-ish rating to any specific few posts, it was really strung out over all of the posts, so I'd suggest that you start providing more information about your opinions and stop making one-word posts or minimodding. Don't minimod at all, but especially don't do it without posting anything related to the topic. Mods may get 100/100 for modding, but regular people don't.

32OrtonEdge32dh: 105
Since the beginning, your posts have seemed good and well thought-out. You didn't really go through the "noob" phase most people do/did, so you had a higher rating overall. Thanks for being mature from the beginning.

1-31: You either didn't think much about your posts, or you fail at providing evidence as to why you feel a certain way. You could've also just littered your posts with misspellings and grammar issues, or just have a bad rep. Start spelling correctly and using proper grammar, and don't just post something random. Think about what the thread is about, and post something related.
32-51: You probably don't think about your posts as well as you should. Your grammar is probably alright, but could use some work, or you need to give us a better reason to believe what you're saying. Go into more detail with your posts.
52-80: You are the average forumer. You may have some slip-ups in your grammar or two, but you otherwise contribute to a topic, but perhaps you could provide alternate solutions to things rather than just telling someone that what they said 'couldn't work' or 'is wrong'. Be nice to others, there are ways to be nice and still correct people.
81-90: You are close to being a perfect forumer. It may be hard to tell what you're doing wrong. Always strive to make sure all of your posts are grammatically correct. Use a browser with built-in spell check to get those occasional misspellings. Don't post something if you're unsure about it's validity.
91-108: You are extremely close to forum nirvana. You most likely have a perfect/near perfect rep, and a high post count doesn't hurt. I honestly can't suggest any way to improve but to post more often (see rating 109), making the post quality the same as or better than it is now.
109-110: Technically, only Different55 can get this rank, and that's if he has a perfect/near perfect rep and gets 95+ rating on post rating and info represented, as well as no forum games/grammar mistakes. Basically, you'd have to be an extremely lucky Different55.

Last edited by JadElClemens (Jan 14 2012 9:12:49 pm)

---

I hate tall signatures.

Wezza

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Maybe Chewy wants to have -87 rate, cause he likes minus reps ;p
Though it think that this is more clear then the other topic, your doing a good job (:

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Thank you.

Actually, it doesn't matter what their total amount of reps is, because the formula goes net rep (the number shown to you) divided by total rep (the total number of + and - reps added together). Because of that, someone with 1 rep could get as many points for it as someone with 100 rep. The max amount of points you can get (having a perfect rep record) is 5.

---

I hate tall signatures.

Krazyman50

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Thanks for the rating... again...

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Mmhmm, third time.

---

I hate tall signatures.

D-rock2308

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

D-rock2308: 79
Once again, SIX FORUM GAMES. Not once again for you, but once again for this entire thing. SIX. You're lucky your rating isn't lower. Aside from the forum games (most of which were short and meaningless, but that's not your fault), your posts were occasionally VERY VERY short, sometimes to the point of being spam (One post was just "   ". That got a 50 in general rating). Others just said "It wouldn't work" or "I didn't like this". This is the biggest problem with you forumers, why didn't you like that? That already brings rating up around 5-10 points. Solutions to the problem generally net you a 100 in that area. I may need to make a SEPERATE topic about this just for tips on how to get max rating.

Great, I knew I would get lowered because of the forum games I played a year ago when I was bored. *facepalm*
And sometimes the :/ means alot because they are so stupid and idiotic that that's all they deserve.

EEguy

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

This is taking aaaages. I want my rating. And I'm hoping that the posts you rate aren't the games that I played when I was bored a year ago, like it happened to D-rock.

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

I apologize, but rating you guys is agonizingly boring and I only do it because you signed up already. It'll come eventually.

---

I hate tall signatures.

EEguy

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

I know it's boring, and I knew it would take long, but I didn't expect it to take this long. And it really looks extremely boring.

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

I apologize, but I never seem to get motivated to do these until 8, then I only have an hour and a half to do them.

---

I hate tall signatures.

Tako

Member

From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 6,663

Website

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

I apologize, but rating you guys is agonizingly boring and I only do it because you signed up already. It'll come eventually.

I warned ya.

---

Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Indeed you did, I'm afraid.

---

I hate tall signatures.

Chimi

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

I suggest indenting, highlighting, or boldfacing the names so people can actually find theirs.

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Hmm. That may just be a suggestion. Lemme see if I can find a good color...

---

I hate tall signatures.

Chimi

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Not that one Try #B90909?

[color=#B90909]#B90909[/color]

Let's also congratulate Zoey on being the first ever to get a post rating of over 100 for making me lol immensely.

She got 98...

Last edited by Chimi (May 30 2011 8:15:56 pm)

supadorf24

Member

Joined: 2015-02-26

Posts: 2,675

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

This is just my opinion, but I feel like this is too heavily based on forum games. In fact, I really don't think that forum games should affect score at all. Playing forum games doesn't contribute anything, yes, but they're on their own. Forum games are isolated from the rest of the forum. Let's say there's a person with 1000 posts. 500 of them are well-thought out helpful posts, the other 500 were in Forum Games. Why not just disclude forum game posts from the score? Forum game posts have no substance and therefore should not be treated as real posts.

Tako

Member

From: Memphis, Tennessee, USA

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 6,663

Website

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

[. . .] Why not just disclude forum game posts from the score? Forum game posts have no substance and therefore should not be treated as real posts.

We can't exclude Forum Games because it would take hours to weed through every last post searching for forum games.

My suggestion: don't go out of your way to look for their posts. Just start at EE Announcements and work your way down to the bottom, reading all the good topics. If you see their post, grade it. If you don't, oh well.

---

Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.

supadorf24

Member

Joined: 2015-02-26

Posts: 2,675

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

[. . .] Why not just disclude forum game posts from the score? Forum game posts have no substance and therefore should not be treated as real posts.

We can't exclude Forum Games because it would take hours to weed through every last post searching for forum games.

No, I'm just saying when you look at "Show all Posts", don't separate forum games from the rest of the posts, but when you're clicking on the posts to grade on, don't pick a forum game.

Jeremifier

Guest

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Wait, what? Forum games? Most of them only have 1 or 2 posts by me, man. And forum games are the most popular threads, so they're at the top page...

Panic

Member

From: Virgo Supercluster

Joined: 2015-05-26

Posts: 1,114

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Lol, about 2 months ago, I went through and poofed all my forum games posts( about 6).

---

Obligatory piece of text placed here forcing you to load an extra 100 bytes of data per post I make.

0176

Member

From: Brazil

Joined: 2021-09-05

Posts: 3,174

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

why you get less points by playing forum games?

Panic

Member

From: Virgo Supercluster

Joined: 2015-05-26

Posts: 1,114

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Because apparently posts are rated on their usefulness. Most sections have places where you can actually have good posts. Forum games, not so much.

---

Obligatory piece of text placed here forcing you to load an extra 100 bytes of data per post I make.

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Not that one Try #B90909?

[color=#B90909]#B90909[/color]

Eh, I like the one I have

Let's also congratulate Zoey on being the first ever to get a post rating of over 100 for making me lol immensely.

She got 98...

Not overall rating, over 100 rating for a single post. "Post rating"

Okay, here's what it looks like to me when I'm rating. You made a post in forum games, I mark "1" in the forum games topic. That's .4 points off score. You get a 50/50, possibly more. +2 points to score (your score starts at 0 and counts up). So, in the end, you get a net of 1.6 points, where the max is 3.6 points. It doesn't count much for 1 or 2 posts, but having massive amounts of posts in forum games causes you to have serious score consequences. I've suggested before that you pick 2-3 forum game topics and only post in them. This is because I only take 1 post from each topic, so I'm only going to judge the first post I find from you (ctrl+f "username"). Forum games aren't that lethal if you only play a few. This tells people to maybe not play as many different forum games, I feel it 'fakes' your post count.

---

I hate tall signatures.

Bobithan

Member

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,476

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Cool I'm a forum game god. Interesting (lol late reply)

---

aka towwl

Pyromaniac

Official Caroler

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,868

Re: Forum Member Rating Service ratings

Hehe. Iim a 91! But whyt spelling mystaakes r uz talking about