What about a "thanks" feature.

[Former Member]

This feature will be a link, or button, under each post for people to thank the poster. You would give them thanks if you feel their post is a great answer or brings something good to the table. Not only would it help people direct their attention to the good posts but it will also aid in searching (if integrated properly). You would see the users that thanks a particular post and the count would show as well.

Davis

[Former Member]

I created a Wiki on the Thanks feature. It isn't very pretty or detailed as I do not have the time to create an outstanding entry right now. If anybody supports the feature, has additions, etc... please voice your opinion at the Wiki. Also, moderators, if it is in the wrong section please move it. This is the most fitting section that I could find.

https://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/x/3sI

[marilyn_pratt]

And a thanks to you Davis!

I would recommend housing it in the wiki page designated for <a href="https://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/display/Community/Community+Projects">Community Projects</a> as this sounds like something for the community to not only comment on, but collaborate around.

Thanks for taking the initiative.

[Former Member]

Marilyn, thanks for pointing me to the right place. I have created a new Wiki in the correct section and alerted the moderators to delete the old one.

Here is the link to the new Wiki. I will also edit my above post with the correct address.

https://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/x/3sI

Davis

[pokrakam]

I agree with the idea, and have made a similar suggestion about using star ratings to multiply blog points

The same principle can be applied:

A simple 5 star rating on a post where users (including the original poster) can vote with a single click. An average rating is shown, and after a certain amount of votes the rating can be awarded to the poster as points (from -2 for 1 star to +2 for 5 star). This way the community can discredit rubbish posts.

Cheers,

Mike

[Former Member]

Instead of awarding points, the system could end up calculating a rating for the poster by using a Bayesian calculation, similar to what IMDB does for movie ratings.

By using a Bayesian calculation on rated posts, you easily prevent gaming the system.

The rating could be complementary to the points system. Someone with a lot of points but a low rating would probably indicate that someone was a point monger.

Brian

[Former Member]

We had a simialr discussion over in the BI Forums,

and one of the comments made was that a "Thanks" rating could be included in the forum search. That way, threads that have accumulated lots of Thanks, would/could appear first in the search results, as those threads are considered to be the most helpful by the community. It would help people find answers quiciker, and provide a greater degree of confidence that the information in the thread is correct.

Perhaps as important, by being a a more reliable indicator of the value of the thread, it should encourage folks to perform a search first, reducing the number of posts.

Call it a "Thanks" feature, or just a "Did you find this thread useful", or whatever you prefer, I think SDN needs to provide some mechanism to help others find the identify the jewels that are out there.

[Former Member]

Pizzaman, the search part of this thanks feature is the biggest draw to the thanks feature, in my opinion anyway. This "thanks" feature would do two things. It would give credit where credit is due but it would also help to improve the search feature. I really hope that people at SDN are looking into this because, in my opinion, it is a no-brainer. You will see me nosing around in the BI forums as I was just put on our, now two, man BI team.

Davis.

[Former Member]

I really like this idea of 'rating' the post. I've seen it used on other technology forums and it is a good indicator of usefulness of the answer.

One thing I saw on one of the posts either here or Coffee Corner was a suggestion (my apologies to the person who suggested it for not remembering your name) to allow us to award points to good answers even after the original poster has assigned points to it. Of course, this could also be abused.

The problem is that no matter what you do, someone will find a way to try and cheat the system.

On the one hand, you want to reward people for their help. On the other hand, as soon as you put in place some kind of reward system it gives incentive to those &^%$@! who abuse the system.

Regardless, if there was a way to award points to questions I didn't open I know I'd use it. There have been so many times that I've struggled with something and finally found a post that addresses my problem exactly AND solves it. When that happens I am SO happy I really want to reward the person who gave the answer but I can't. I've even gone so far as to try and look up someone's email so I could send them a message thanking them. : )

Message was edited by:

David Z. Pantich

[Former Member]

> The problem is that no matter what you do, someone

> will find a way to try and cheat the system.

I agree, people will try to find a way to cheat the system. However, if you do not tie the thanks to points then you will have no reason to cheat the system. Say I make a post that only one person found useful and you make a post that 1000 people found useful. If every person, who found the two posts useful, "thanked" us, you would not be any better off than I am. The only people who would be effected by the thanks are the people who search for answers and find your post, where 1000 people thanked you.

If you tie the "thanks" system in with points then you will get abuse and it will defeat the purpose of the system.

Davis

[Former Member]

I think the best approach would be to simply let a "Thanks" be just that and not get involved with "Points". A thread's value may be due to just one person's response, or the value may be the results of the collaboration of multiple folks, including the person who posted the original question.

All we really want to do is unlock/identify the relative value of one thread versus another. If we must assign points, perhaps you award points/thanks to the thread, but that's as far as they go - no points going to people.

[Former Member]

I've made a plug in the past for something along these lines.

This provides a really good guide to someone searching a forum which threads on a topic they might want to look at first. If my search returns 37 threads on a topic, one of which has many, many "Thanks" (or whatever you want to call them) that indicate the information in this thread was found to be useful by many SDN members, then I know which one I will probably look at first.

This gives us a better tool to filter the chafe from the wheat. On my search criteria, I might then narrow the search to the Top 3 threads based on "Thanks".

I think this would also encourage/reward a poster to provide more than the minimal answer, providing more detail, background, etc.

[Former Member]

Hi Davis,

According to what I've learned on this forum, is that "The SDN Way of saying thanks is rewarding useful answers"...

P.S : And it works ,

e.g

and

Cheers,

Tatvagna

Message was edited by:

Tatvagna Shah

[Former Member]

That is the SDN way but it is not the best way, IMO. The SDN way only allows the original poster to give thanks, not the hundreds who find the post useful. The points system does not make searching easier (one of the huge downfalls with SDN) and the Thanks system would.

Davis

[David]

An interesting idea. However, I am not convinced that this would be an improvement. Both the Thanks system and the current one are ratings system that have a time dependency. In our present system, it is assumed that the person with the highest points gives the best answers. However, a new member can suddenly appear who has a better answer for a specific problem than a well established one. They don't stand out as such because of their smaller points level. The same thing would be the case when rating answers. An answer posted on the site several weeks in the past, might have a higher rating simply because it has existed on the site for a longer period of time.

Since both make the assumption that higher points is better, they really aren't much different in terms of this time dependent weakness.

This being the case, I say the people rating system is better than the answer rating system as the odds are better that a person with a higher rating will give better answers over a longer time span.

Best Regards,

David

[Former Member]

David, I understand your position but this thanks system would be for the posts and not the posters. It wouldn't matter if the poster with the best answer only had 11 points because the post is what is important. If 100 people find it helpful and 100 people give thanks for it then that single post will stand out. This system was not meant to replace the current point system; they are totally different. One system (points) is designed more for the individual while the thanks system is designed more for the post. It was really designed to aid in searching, which it would do.

Davis

[Former Member]

I must say I like the idea a lot.

I way of allocating an amount of credit, usefulness, quality to a post.

Posts vary in quality and credibility.

The existing points system serves a valuable purpose. To Reward the Poster.

However, others Indicating a post to be valuable is a completing differently matter. And potentially more valuable to sdn community. This a SDN speaking and growing.

Just as many sites use a MOST viewed, most downloaded, etc.

Most awarded, or most useful indication would be extremely useful search criteria.

Quality posts accessed over and over again would quickly rise to the top of a list.

I think this idea deserves close analysis.

I would certainly use the criteria to quickly find posts.

Please consider the Idea.

Perhaps a "creedos" point. Or something more mundane like Useful tick.

The CREEDOS points stay with the post.

Perhaps the poster get more points if a post go over say 100 CREEDOS points.

But the main idea is about CONTENT quality and usefulness.

Cheers

Phil