GeekySweetie
Acquaintance
Edit: Thank you guys for your feedback, after asking around in a few communities I decided to adjust my scoring. Now the lowest member has a 4.2 and we have 4 5 star earners and the rest range from 4.3 to 4.8 🙂 Your feedback really helped me - and hopefully helped these other loopers too - I know some people depend on that extra income and I also do appreciate everyone's help getting my forum up and running so it's all good.
Original post remains below:
This is crossposted to/from the /r/Postloop subreddit
I am a new forum moderator and still trying to learn the ropes of using postloop from a buyer's endpoint instead of a writer's perspective. I went through and evaluated all of my members recently, and I got a note back from one of them stating that my rating was the lowest rating they had ever received on postloop.
My methodology was to start everyone at 3, which postloop tells me is average. I even took time to draft it all out in notepad. Starting everyone at 3, and then adding points when I saw superior quality.
This user by no means is a "bad" poster. But 3 isn't bad, or is it? Are moderators afraid to use anything under 4? Is 4 the "new average"?
I checked to see what the community average was, because I don't want to screw someone over and not let them cash out - because I know that would suck, and at time of my ratings, 3.2 was the average, which reinforced my belief that it was normal to give people ratings of 3.
This user had 5 or 6 posts, each of which were 2 or 3 sentences - which to me is just kinda "average". 4 is supposed to be "great" and 5 "excellent". I just personally don't see anything that "great" about the quality of this user's posts. They aren't "bad" by ANY stretch of the imagination, he speaks perfect English and used correct punctuation and grammar and had at least a mild interest in the subject matter, but I wouldn't call them "great" either when compared to other users on the forum who I felt actually "earned" a great or excellent rating. And there were plenty of users who I did give 3.x ratings to, and only 2 acted upset by this.
I adjusted his score from 3.2 to 3.9 - reluctant still to give him a 4.
But if I hear back that "oh no you should never rate 3 on anyone" then I will go back through and make sure everyone has at least a 4.
He showed me his other ratings from other users and he consistently has 4s and even 2 5s. The thing that sucks is that my rating caused one of those 5's to drop off his average, since post loop uses the last 10 ratings received. He was upset (perhaps understandably so) that his new average took him from earning 10 cents a post to 6 cents a post. I feel that even if I do give him a 4, his average is still gonna drop considerably, cuz of losing that coveted 5. And I don't want to screw anyone over, but I just really don't feel, at least in the case of my forum, that a 5 is justified. I really don't even feel a 4 is justified as to me, it's not "great".
I have yet to give a 5 to anyone on my forum (though I've come close with 3 or 4 users earning 4.8's). Postloop's directions to forum owners make it sound like 5's should almost never ever be given to anyone. In fact, they say if you give too many 5's to users they will ban you from using post loop. But if I give this guy a 4 or 4.5, I definitely feel that the users I've given 4's and 4.x's to should be given 5s. I already feel like by giving him 3.9 I've already ranked him higher than other users who I feel have put in my time and effort.
But maybe 3's are something that moderators only give to the worst of the worst of posters. What do you think? Is 3 "average" or is 3 "terrible"? Should a 4 or higher be given on principle of good English and grammar alone, or should 4's be reserved for cases of passionate discussion about your subject matter (combined of course with English, grammar, and ettiquette.) I feel like "just" having good English, is only "average".
Original post remains below:
This is crossposted to/from the /r/Postloop subreddit
I am a new forum moderator and still trying to learn the ropes of using postloop from a buyer's endpoint instead of a writer's perspective. I went through and evaluated all of my members recently, and I got a note back from one of them stating that my rating was the lowest rating they had ever received on postloop.
My methodology was to start everyone at 3, which postloop tells me is average. I even took time to draft it all out in notepad. Starting everyone at 3, and then adding points when I saw superior quality.
This user by no means is a "bad" poster. But 3 isn't bad, or is it? Are moderators afraid to use anything under 4? Is 4 the "new average"?
I checked to see what the community average was, because I don't want to screw someone over and not let them cash out - because I know that would suck, and at time of my ratings, 3.2 was the average, which reinforced my belief that it was normal to give people ratings of 3.
This user had 5 or 6 posts, each of which were 2 or 3 sentences - which to me is just kinda "average". 4 is supposed to be "great" and 5 "excellent". I just personally don't see anything that "great" about the quality of this user's posts. They aren't "bad" by ANY stretch of the imagination, he speaks perfect English and used correct punctuation and grammar and had at least a mild interest in the subject matter, but I wouldn't call them "great" either when compared to other users on the forum who I felt actually "earned" a great or excellent rating. And there were plenty of users who I did give 3.x ratings to, and only 2 acted upset by this.
I adjusted his score from 3.2 to 3.9 - reluctant still to give him a 4.
But if I hear back that "oh no you should never rate 3 on anyone" then I will go back through and make sure everyone has at least a 4.
He showed me his other ratings from other users and he consistently has 4s and even 2 5s. The thing that sucks is that my rating caused one of those 5's to drop off his average, since post loop uses the last 10 ratings received. He was upset (perhaps understandably so) that his new average took him from earning 10 cents a post to 6 cents a post. I feel that even if I do give him a 4, his average is still gonna drop considerably, cuz of losing that coveted 5. And I don't want to screw anyone over, but I just really don't feel, at least in the case of my forum, that a 5 is justified. I really don't even feel a 4 is justified as to me, it's not "great".
I have yet to give a 5 to anyone on my forum (though I've come close with 3 or 4 users earning 4.8's). Postloop's directions to forum owners make it sound like 5's should almost never ever be given to anyone. In fact, they say if you give too many 5's to users they will ban you from using post loop. But if I give this guy a 4 or 4.5, I definitely feel that the users I've given 4's and 4.x's to should be given 5s. I already feel like by giving him 3.9 I've already ranked him higher than other users who I feel have put in my time and effort.
But maybe 3's are something that moderators only give to the worst of the worst of posters. What do you think? Is 3 "average" or is 3 "terrible"? Should a 4 or higher be given on principle of good English and grammar alone, or should 4's be reserved for cases of passionate discussion about your subject matter (combined of course with English, grammar, and ettiquette.) I feel like "just" having good English, is only "average".
