Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

You have spoken!

The StartupNation community has told us that you want the member ratings to be changed.

We’re listening!

We have taken down the current rating system as we work to implement a new & improved strategy. Many of you have shared your opinions on what to include and exclude in a new system. We`re still listening!  Feel free to post a comment here so that we may be certain to take all things into consideration as we roll out a tool that is truly valuable.

You guys & gals rock!

Joel

-------------------------

Joel Welsh
chief community officer
StartupNation

Joel -

The previous system seems to have become a method for some members to "get back" at others for posting a response, constructive criticism or information they personally don`t like.  The appearance of "mystery" new anonymous members recently has seemed to be directly related to the ratings of several SuN members (whose opinions I always welcome) dropping dramatically.

Rather than rating individuals, where it seems to become almost a popularity contest (or method to "punish" someone), perhaps the system should be one of rating the value of a particular post/thread to the SuN member rating the post/topic.  I`ve seen such rating systems on other forums - I`ll try to find an example.

- J.





-------------------------

Jeff Fisher | Jeff Fisher LogoMotives | Tweet! Tweet!

Joel -

I just checked out 19 online design industry forums that I have visited on occasion.  Some had "was this post of value to you?" ratings systems in place in the past.  It`s interesting that none of them having any kind of ratings system in place at all at the present.

- J.




-------------------------

Jeff Fisher | Jeff Fisher LogoMotives | Tweet! Tweet!

Hmm ... extremely interesting, Jeff.

Thanks for the market research!


-------------------------

Joel Welsh
chief community officer
StartupNation

Joel -

Speaking as perfect "5," I really loved the system as it was!  (Okay, I only had one vote, but I`ll take it where I can get it!)    Thank you, whoever you are!

I can definitely see where this kind of rating system could be abused - and be hurtful.  I would suggest that if ratings are necessary at all, how about making them "invisible," i.e., only accessible by you and other people in the need-to- know department.  Then, periodically, you could post the top "winners" - the consistently highest rated individuals - as recognition of their popularity due to their contributions to the rest of us.

Just my thoughts . . . 

Linda

I noticed earlier that the ratings were gone. I too agree with Jeff that at times it seemed like a popularity contest or a revenge thing. I for one although I posted anyway think that it altered some peoples responses especially the ones just starting out. I think in time the more people that stay on here the more they will be able to see who they want to talk to and trust.
  I think it is a good idea. It is interesting that out of 19 sites none had ratings going on at the present time.
 


-------------------------

Confession: I gave only those people who i conversed with a rating of 1. Then as i dealt more and appreciated their entries, wisdom, and helpfull answers to my questions, I would change their ratings accordingly. Yes, definitely a negative response to the person, rather than the idea or issue will keep the rating at 1. As immediate improvement to your rating system I would like you to recognize key leaders through "home office evaluation" and adjust the ratings for obvious leadership to not reflect random and unjust criticism because a person was not sympahetic to someone`s needs. I have been taken down a peg as just criticism of not understanding the question put forth. But if everyone tried to make sure that all questions were answered on their threads, in kindness to struggling entrepreneurs, there would be more love shown in ratings than if we were all dismissed, challenged and ridiculed because we wern`t on the same page. YOU at the home office Have The Power to step in and adjust ratings by considering the dialouge and rewarding the most valuable players who show genuine care that every member of StartUp Nation recieves the best answer to any question that is raised. I`m thinking...How about "did this person contribute to your success?" Yes or No. P.S. The Fair Criticism Act defines a persons responsibility in public to be "no less than genuine, no more than scientific" This means that in web related discussions, the prove-able is more valuable than opinion and therefore all answers given should reflect the wealth of proof in the marketplace. A site reference holds weight. A persons opinion is only as good as the listeners Ah Ha! moment. that they may not have considered the given opinion in terms of how they will place themselves in the public eye. Everyone. Welcome to Ratings 1 on One. Let`s see how the "home office" responds to the Creative Brainstorming of people like YOU who may or may not give a care so long as we keep the Leaders humble and the Antagonists at bay. 

Joel - I really like Jeff`s idea about rating the post, and not the peeps. :)

-------------------------

Chris

The Dippy Chick Company, Inc.

I think there needs to be some mechanism to decrease the number of posts that are not related to the topic being discussed.  I have seen threads that include posts that are completely off topic.  I think readers tune in to the topic to hear about that topic and not just somebody speaking to hear the sound of his/her own voice.  We`ve all read the long rambling posts and asked, "what is this guy saying and how is it relevant to the topic?"  I understand the desire to prevent ratings as a mechanism for "revenge."  I also think there needs to be some sort of red flag for those posts and posters that don`t know how to read something and exercise some restraint.

 

If the topic is “the price of tea in china”, readers don’t need or want to read a post about panda bears in china or bamboo shoots in china and other things that are simply not contributing to the exchange of information on that topic.  I think this is merely common sense and common courtesy.  Unfortunately, it appears to be not common enough.

-------------------------

James Lindon, Ph.D. Patent Attorney
Lindon & Lindon, LLC
Cleveland, Ohio
Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Pharmacy Law, Litigation
[this is not legal advice - provided for discussion only]
Intellectual Property for the Individual and Small Business: Identify, Protect, Enforce, Defend.
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread."
http://www.LindonLaw.com

How about a SuN electoral college system. Allow voting by everyone all the time but not show results right away. Then monthly or quarterly allow the SuN Team members to score or top original posters to rate on a standard of Good - Better - Best advice or Bronze, Silver or Gold members.

However, this may be more involved than SuN team members want.

And how about not call it voting - call it member feedback. The meaning of voting has really changed in this country since 2000.

I`m afraid until SuN is a monthly member fee service, there will always be problems. 

Or... maybe voting should be done away with altogether.

Thanks Joel!

We definitely need a better voting policy. At least basic rules.

Tony Russ

Design Ideas Marketing Associates

www.designideas.tv