Bring back Ratings!! - A Proposal

[Love Zhaoying]

But..but..you should TRUST me, I have a HIGH RATING..!

[Sukubia Scarmon]

I'd be worried that some creators would start using that as a metric for their bloggers. "Gotta have at least a score of XX to blogg for us!" Would that be silly? Yes. But not outlandish an idea. 

Also, yeah, mental health. Maybe there's no downvoting, but the lack of upvotes would take up that mental space instead after a while. And I don't think people would enjoy the feeling of not being one of the cool kids once again. 

In the end, I don't really get it. For me, such a system is pointless from the start - it will be gamed, people will propably only upvote their friends or people they hope to gain something from, and people might feel left out because they got not enough time to go rub ellbows.

[Evangeline Arcadia]

6 hours ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

Perhaps You have forgotten that you could downvote people as well. They system was removed because bullies gang up and downvote vulnerable people, just because they thought it was funny. With mental health issues as prevalent as they are, why introduce a popularity system into SL? 

 

This. I think any kind of social credit score is a bad idea. I would hate to see this in SL.  If people want more parties, then they'll just have to take some action and arrange them:) I don't think we need the proposed rating system for that.

[Love Zhaoying]

4 minutes ago, Evangeline Arcadia said:

This. I think any kind of social credit score is a bad idea.

Whenever I see "social credit score", I think "bad (totalitarian, etc.) governments are using these!!"

[Coffee Pancake]

3 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Not only was it gamed, it was a griefing vector. So you could be a good builder or a good socializer but if someone didn't like something you said somewhere, you'd get negrated on those features.

You didn't read the proposal closely enough .. there is no mention of downvoting anyone. It was omitted deliberately. 

1 hour ago, Polenth Yue said:

It's odd that people think it'd help creators.

In practical terms, no it wouldn't .. especially as the growth rate is capped. Everyone's favorite creator ends up with a score the same as everyone's favorite socialite, and the stipend bonus is inconsequential. But it's a good example of an applied social meaning which is what the system is intended to generate.

Forumites aren't representative of the wider SL. I very much doubt any system I propose will land well here .. however the make up of the forumites is itself an emergent outcome of the underlying systems.

The key to emergent online social dynamics is the systems upon which they develop. In a place like SL, every system has a social outcome. In the case of ratings, when that system was removed we lost more than just some profile flair.

49 minutes ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

I'd be worried that some creators would start using that as a metric for their bloggers. "Gotta have at least a score of XX to blogg for us!" Would that be silly? Yes. But not outlandish an idea. 

It's a far lower requirement than a certain site I wont mention by name that chews through and burns out bloggers.

49 minutes ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

Also, yeah, mental health. Maybe there's no downvoting, but the lack of upvotes would take up that mental space instead after a while. And I don't think people would enjoy the feeling of not being one of the cool kids once again. 

In the end, I don't really get it. For me, such a system is pointless from the start - it will be gamed, people will propably only upvote their friends or people they hope to gain something from, and people might feel left out because they got not enough time to go rub ellbows.

I think SL is big and diverse enough to negate those outcomes. As we all know from school, trying to hang with the cools kids can only ever end in disaster, so something that pushes someone to move on from that and find actual real friends is a positive outcome, even if initially it sucks.

The requirement to get 100 votes and the limitations how often people can vote for the same avatar is deliberate, it makes limiting this to a social circle ineffective. After all, the goal is to hit 100 as early as possible in the month. People would have garner points from strangers which will be inherently reciprocal.

7 minutes ago, Evangeline Arcadia said:

This. I think any kind of social credit score is a bad idea. I would hate to see this in SL.  

You're going to hate it when you find out about avatar age, payment info markers and (now) premium membership status being accessible from script. Then we have ARC, script count, avatar quality .. myriad things easily used to prejudge based on arbitrary attributes.

There are lots of places on the grid where a new account will be kick banned on sight, simply for failing to pass the age "score".

[Love Zhaoying]

Are only "negatories" replying to the thread? Not sure if I saw 1 or maybe 2 replies in support of the OP's idea?

[Qie Niangao]

Is there any particular reason the ratings would be public? Apparently they're to be displayed on profiles?[*] I don't see how that's useful.

(Maybe that was how the old ratings worked, I don't recall; I think ratings were already mostly deprecated by the time I joined in 2006—I certainly don't remember any L$ incentives attached to them.)

Also, the more responses I read, the more I'm convinced: However this should work, it must apply to Basic members, and be available immediately upon completing orientation. If there's no way to make that work without inviting untenable gaming (and there may not be) then I don't see much point.

 

______________
[ * ETA: I saw this:

20 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

• Profile shows this months rating score, and your all time running total.

but I'd assumed that was one's own private profile, not shown to the world. I guess I assumed wrong? Still, why is making it public a good idea? ]

Edited February 6, 2023 by Qie Niangao

[Coffee Pancake]

11 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Is there any particular reason the ratings would be public? Apparently they're to be displayed on profiles? I don't see how that's useful.

(Maybe that was how the old ratings worked, I don't recall; I think ratings were already mostly deprecated by the time I joined in 2006—I certainly don't remember any L$ incentives attached to them.)

Also, the more responses I read, the more I'm convinced: However this should work, it must apply to Basic members, and be available immediately upon completing orientation. If there's no way to make that work without inviting untenable gaming (and there may not be) then I don't see much point.

Ratings were directly linked to stipend. You needed to get ratings to get the full stipend.

Basics can't join in this one as it's a source of L$. If they could then the outcome is that people will make many alts to pool free money which is exactly why LL shut them down last time.

Basics getting ratings could have benefits aside from currency, but that's literally anything LL felt like giving away and beyond the scope of this proposal. 

Even without a direct tangible, basics with ratings begs the question "whats this for .. oh right.. premium".

 

As for ratings being publicly visible, I don't think it has the harm that some are suggesting.

I have not added a way for LSL to get the ratings score, again, on purpose.

The total amount obtainable is capped at 100 per month .. so it ends up being a participation marker that only has real meaning to the owner. So be it maxed out, or as in in Rowen's case forever zero, it's good for bragging rights and little else .. which as bragging rights goes, pales into insignificance next to the ability to type "Queen of the known universe" into the actual profile. 

If people care about someones rating (if they care about their own, they will), then they have to open profiles to get it .. which is one of the intended behavioral outcomes of the system.

 

[Sukubia Scarmon]

56 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

It's a far lower requirement than a certain site I wont mention by name that chews through and burns out bloggers.

I think SL is big and diverse enough to negate those outcomes. As we all know from school, trying to hang with the cools kids can only ever end in disaster, so something that pushes someone to move on from that and find actual real friends is a positive outcome, even if initially it sucks.

You're going to hate it when you find out about avatar age, payment info markers and (now) premium membership status being accessible from script. Then we have ARC, script count, avatar quality .. myriad things easily used to prejudge based on arbitrary attributes.There are lots of places on the grid where a new account will be kick banned on sight, simply for failing to pass the age "score".

I agree, it is, and I don't enjoy those requirements either - not just because I certainly would not meet them. But it'd not replace that, instead, it'd only add on top.

Hrm. I do get what you'Re saying, but at the same time, I feel that there's still a difference - partially, because in RL you do not have a profile with a constant reminder on display. 

 

For the last paragraph:

We know that, but you also know that people don't like that. You've seen people coming to the forums being distrought about being unable to go to some place, or being kicked out due to their age, for example. So why add another metric that could lead to more of that?

 

[Coffee Pancake]

10 minutes ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

We know that, but you also know that people don't like that. You've seen people coming to the forums being distrought about being unable to go to some place, or being kicked out due to their age, for example. So why add another metric that could lead to more of that?

I would happy see all such information removed from profiles, but that's never going to happen as the outcry from those suddenly unable to see them will carry far more weight.

So plan B .. dilute the nonsense metrics by adding more.

[Polenth Yue]

1 hour ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Forumites aren't representative of the wider SL. I very much doubt any system I propose will land well here .. however the make up of the forumites is itself an emergent outcome of the underlying systems.

The forum doesn't always represent what's going on inworld, but this is not one of those times. You also lived through the era where we'd be spammed with bite requests everywhere. That game had to redesign the system to avoid strangers being harassed by players. Your idea isn't going to fly without a redesign, because it encourages the same behaviour.

Realistically, it's never going to happen as an official thing, whether you rework the idea or not. But you could launch it as a game if you wanted. A lot of potential issues will go away by making it opt-in and requiring the HUD to play.

[Kathlen Onyx]

4 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

I would happy see all such information removed from profiles, but that's never going to happen as the outcry from those suddenly unable to see them will carry far more weight.

So plan B .. dilute the nonsense metrics by adding more.

So now after three pages we finally get to the real reason why you are suggesting this. When are you going to stop being so bitter against LL.

[Coffee Pancake]

3 minutes ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

So now after three pages we finally get to the real reason why you are suggesting this. When are you going to stop being so bitter against LL.

I have absolutely no words. What.

[Sammy Huntsman]

I don't feel particularly comfortable, having a rating placed on my profile. That and I feel like stuff like that would create a whole lot of bullying. That and why do we need a social credit score in SL? So if you don't hit a rating, you can't enter a sim or region? Again, this is a big no from me.  

[Cinnamon Mistwood]

I can't think of a single way that this will impact my SL either negatively or positively, so I guess I have no opinion. 

Have fun proposing the new thing.

[Coffee Pancake]

8 minutes ago, Polenth Yue said:

But you could launch it as a game if you wanted. A lot of potential issues will go away by making it opt-in and requiring the HUD to play.

It can't work as a 3rd party HUD as it uses L$ as the motivator.

Those L$ would have to come from somewhere, which as things stand is almost exclusively places trying to game traffic scores. To function in that ecosystem the changes in mechanics required would negate the entire purpose behind the proposal.

The ratings system itself and the L$ bonus are not the point, those are just mechanics to deliver social and behavioral outcomes.

Eg - If we placed a gun in every newbies hand when the first joined SL, we would see a lot more shooting in SL from all demographics.

Just now, Sammy Huntsman said:

I don't feel particularly comfortable, having a rating placed on my profile. That and I feel like stuff like that would create a whole lot of bullying. That and why do we need a social credit score in SL? So if you don't hit a rating, you can't enter a sim or region? Again, this is a big no from me.  

There is no mention of this score being accessible to LSL, so as such its impractical to use as gate keeping tool.

This is not a social credit score.

Bullying in the old system was based on gang downvoting. This has no downvoting. 

[Sammy Huntsman]

2 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

It can't work as a 3rd party HUD as it uses L$ as the motivator.

Those L$ would have to come from somewhere, which as things stand is almost exclusively places trying to game traffic scores. To function in that ecosystem the changes in mechanics required would negate the entire purpose behind the proposal.

The ratings system itself and the L$ bonus are not the point, those are just mechanics to deliver social and behavioral outcomes.

Eg - If we placed a gun in every newbies hand when the first joined SL, we would see a lot more shooting in SL from all demographics.

But here is the thing, we would not be able to keep a decent userbase. As I just learned, that they would only come on for this and then log off. So gaming a system would not work. We need to find other solutions to bring in more people and keep them. 

[Sammy Huntsman]

A good example is if we were to pay people to read books. They would only read the books to receive the money, they won't read books just to enjoy the content. The same goes for SL, they will come for the money and probably won't stay for the content in SL. As you can exchange your Ls for actual real-world money. 

[Coffee Pancake]

7 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

But here is the thing, we would not be able to keep a decent userbase. As I just learned, that they would only come on for this and then log off. So gaming a system would not work. We need to find other solutions to bring in more people and keep them. 

There is no single "fix" for SL's retention and engagement woes. 

LL can polish the new user experience till the cows come home, it wont move the needle. We know this because they have been polishing it consistently for almost 20 years. The new user experience part does it's job .. things fall apart after that. Which is where adapting systems to encourage outcomes comes into play.

A good example would be daily activities in MMOs. Players loath doing them. But they get everyone in game every single day, which is why they exist at all.

5 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

The same goes for SL, they will come for the money and probably won't stay for the content in SL. As you can exchange your Ls for actual real-world money. 

Which is why this is a premium only perk - they money isn't free, its a bonus users have to exert effort to claim.

An extra 30L a week after paying for premium isn't enough to get anyone excited to cash out. But it is an extra purchase in the weekend sales .. as reward for engaging with other people.

[EliseAnne85]

12 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

This is not a social credit score.

Bullying in the old system was based on gang downvoting. This has no downvoting. 

Even so, the Dinkies and Tinies of the Shire could mostly care less.  I cannot speak for all of them, but I would not opt into this nor bother to take the time to write things for people.  Many of my Dinkie and Tinies friends may have this song below as our theme song because we don't care about yours and anyone's reputation.  It's still some kind of status thing.  For Dinkies and Tinies, meh about a good or bad reputation.  Of course, Dinkies and Tinies are joking, sort of cuz we just likes to have fun.

 

[Lysistrata Szapira]

I see this having as much chance to get implemented by LL as Patch volunteering to pose for RL nude photos.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

A good example is if we were to pay people to read books. They would only read the books to receive the money, they won't read books just to enjoy the content. The same goes for SL, they will come for the money and probably won't stay for the content in SL. As you can exchange your Ls for actual real-world money. 

This happened when I was a kid, both with books and with grades (pay from parents, mostly). And in some schools, attendance!

[Love Zhaoying]

52 minutes ago, Lysistrata Szapira said:

I see this having as much chance to get implemented by LL as Patch volunteering to pose for RL nude photos.

Can I vote for one, but not the other?

[Rowan Amore]

Who the hell are these cool kids and SL socialites?  Did I miss some memo?  You do know being popular in SL.or the SL forums, for that matter, means nothing?

People.who.are premium have already decided to.some degree, to stay for awhile.  Since this whole idea has nothing to.do with basic accounts, you know, the ones new residents usually have, what exactly is the point?  Yippee!  An extra 100L a month!  Not much of an incentive to even bother.  

The one thing it will do?  Show me who the heck to avoid.  Maybe it's not such a bad idea after all.

[Bree Giffen]

I’m not sure LL will want to hand out more money to residents based on their rating.  Perhaps, if LL were to reduce all premium payouts and then premium residents must claw that money back by improving their ratings? It would be more like reshuffling the current payout to residents instead of paying out an additional amount. I’m not a premium so it won’t affect me.