I can't rate??

I can't rate??

by Steve Hyndman -
Number of replies: 10

Hummm...I don't seem to be able to rate any longer. Have ratings been disabled already or is that some new punishment just for me wink

Also, I don't see the criteria for a silly rater...is this based on data? Also, where's the icon to identify us silly raters? How is one to who we are and who else is in our group? 

Steve

Attachment silly.jpg
Average of ratings: Useful (2)
In reply to Steve Hyndman

Re: I can't rate??

by Marc Grober -
You mean you did not render thyself a silly rater? You have been pilloried? I notice that if you look to see who is a silly rater the moodle says there are none.... Is this just a silly prank? But I searched for Silly Prankster under roles and found not a one.....

Frankly I wonder if we get to vote on new roles or whether someone is just going to assign them to us?

This is so much fun it should be illegal!
In reply to Marc Grober

Re: I can't rate??

by Steve Hyndman -

No prank...it's there. I've been marked and banned from rating...reminds me of a button I saw arond here once before....

Steve

Attachment censorship.jpg
In reply to Steve Hyndman

Re: I can't rate??

by Matt Campbell -
It probably would have helped your cause if you hadn't started rating PHMs with one star, no matter what the content, and non-PHMs with seven stars, no matter the content.

Specific examples can be found at:

http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=98080
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=98178
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=98170
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=97829

There are plenty more if anyone cares to look.

While you don't seem to be doing it with all PHMs, it does appear that you are making a concerted effort to try to drop the ratings for several here on Moodle.org. I don't usually get involved in this sort of thing, but having been involved on Moodle for a few years before I managed to earn this designation, I have to say that I find it very offensive that you've chosen to make a point just to see if you can affect their ratings. It's very silly and I'm sure that's why you're now considered a 'Silly Rater'.

Thanks,
Matt
In reply to Matt Campbell

SIlliputians??

by Marc Grober -
I had promised myself to keep my mouth shut for a few days but I am apparently too weak....

I think you have things 180 degrees off, Matt.

It looks like Steve did the ratings to make the point, not made the point to see if the ratings could be effected. Indeed, if we assume for a moment, arguendo, that his analysis of the ratings posted with which he took exception is spot on, and that his observations were met with opprobrium by those relying on such a system, then the exercise you found offensive was not only a logical next step to illustrate the problem, but very appropriate.

Now, if I were to rate the post in which you opined being offended, I would have to suggest that is was not useful at all and seemed to focus more on your emotional response to having a status of which you are deservedly proud called into question because of a dispute over potential abuse of a rating system in which the person first arguing the potential for abuse has been cast (as Shatan has been since for hundreds of years) as evil. Should you view such a rating as ad hominem? While I think it would be foolish so to do I honestly don't see that my sensibilities would govern your response.

And I noticed in reviewing the ratings you did not take exception to Steve's rating of my postings in the same thread. Thorny problem there.... Are you gong to risk offending me by saying that Steve was being silly in rating my posts? Or are you going to claim that sometimes Steve's ratings were not silly? And if the latter, who is the arbiter of that (well that apparently is moot as we know who is the arbiter of that, don't we......)

John inquires as to where one might sign up to become identified as a "Silly Rater".... while his purpose may be rhetorical, I would be remiss in not furthering his sentiment.... though I think we may need to become a bit more formal and suggest that silliputians as a nominative, in deference to Dean Swift, a particular hero of mine....


In reply to Marc Grober

Re: Silliputians! Can I go live near some?

by Matt Campbell -
I probably am 180 degrees off on this. I recognize that there are a number of people here that are much more knowledgable than I am in so many different ways and since I really only hit four or five forums unless I have a specific issue I'm trying to track down, I miss a lot of other discussions that occur here. I've always found moodle.org to be a place I can come for help, to answer questions, and in the process, expand my own knowledge. I certainly don't get involved in many of the discussions, nor do I typically read them. I tend to get more and more involved just before and just after major Moodle updates as I'm working to get our installs ready to go. I contribute in the forums, in the docs, and in the tracker, nearly all of it in a technical aspect and none of which to any great extent but I've managed to get some modicum of respect for it here and in the circles where I work.

I don't tend to get involved in much else here. I don't have the time, inclination, or energy for it. I have a full-time job that includes WAY more than just Moodle, and I come here to Moodle to relax a bit and give back to a community that has given me so much. I have plenty of people that IM, email, or phone me for advice and I freely give it to them if possible. I've had some people ask if I'm interested in doing some Moodle consultation, but I've always turned it down while offering to help out a bit for free if and as I can. (Although I guess I should disclose that we're hosting a MoodleMoot in June that we're charging for - but at $99 per person for two days, we're not going to see a profit out of it, just hoping to cover costs!)

There are a number of PHMs that are doing exactly this same thing, that have no affiliation with a Moodle Partner, and probably never will, but are just in this to try to help out and do something to give back. We do this because we enjoy it. We might get rated well for it, we might not. We might get a reply thanking us for this, we might not. As John Isner said, it's very haphazard but I've always thought Martin D. and Helen used some judgment in determining who really deserves to be a PHM and I hope they continue to do so, rather than just relying upon a script that looks at the ratings.

I don't know the whole story behind what's going on between Steve and Martin D. I don't claim to. I don't really care. What I do know is that Steve has had a problem with Martin D and how the Moodle Partners are set up. Recently, it seems that Steve has extended that problem to PHMs, and has made several statements to the effect that we exist to support Moodle Partners and foster business, and since Moodle Partners are evil, so are we.

Maybe what he's saying has got some validity. Whether he was right or wrong, he had the right to say it and was able to do so. I have seen Martin D. defend Steve on this. But when he indiscriminately acted, with no care for the damage he was doing, he went from being the guy standing on a soapbox on the street corner espousing his beliefs to all that cared to listen, to the drunk man screaming on the same street corner in the middle of the night. Such a thing is not tolerated in society and it should not be tolerated here, and Martin D had every right, no - he had the responsibility - to act upon it.

As I stated, Steve gave PHMs one star, and non-PHMs seven, no matter what the content was. In some cases those ratings may have been deserved, but not in others - and how would someone know if they only went by the rating? I know that this is the argument he was trying to make. I understand that and I'm pretty sure I know what he was trying to do. However, by deciding to do this and then acting upon that thought, he became a 'silly rater' - whether or not some of those ratings were actually silly. There's a whole entire conversation going on about ratings - some think they're not necessary and can be taken advantage of, while others think that they are a helpful way to show a user that is looking for reliable advice to know that the advice actually is helpful. One of the things that could happen when you have ratings, and when you designate a user as knowledgeable based on their ratings, is that someone could take advantage of that to purposely lower or raise another user's reputation. It appears to me that this is the point Steve was trying to make, but he convoluted it by including his problems with the Moodle Partners system. Steve acted upon this. If you're going to have a rating system, then you must include a way to deal with users that continually use inappropriate ratings. Guess what? Martin D. acted upon this.

When I posted about the ratings, I did not know that Martin D. had done more than remove Steve's ability to rate. I see that he's done far more than that now. I also see that Steve has apologized to me, and I accept his apology. That doesn't change the fact that his actions were inappropriate and he was punished as a result of that. I do hope that Steve is able to realize that there is a difference between words and actions, and that there is a line between them. I very much respect the Steve that is helpful and provides very insightful and astute solutions to the questions that are asked and I wish we had more of that.

That said, I now end the longest post I've ever made on moodle.org that didn't have any code in it.

Thanks,
Matt
Average of ratings: Useful (3)
In reply to Steve Hyndman

Re: I can't rate??

by John Isner -
Sad, sad, sad. IMO ratings should be disabled for everyone.

http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=89722:

Here are some reasons why I am generally opposed to ratings, and think that they do more harm than good. First of all, we do not have a well-established culture of rating. Rating is haphazard. Some discussions have no ratings. Other discussions have no ratings until someone rates and then the ratings start flying. Some people never rate posts. Others rate posts for dubious reasons, such as to advance a personal agenda (give a good rating to a post that takes your position in an argument, but give it a bad rating to one that disagrees with you).
If ratings are ever used to rank people, the situation will get far worse. It could easily degenerate into an easily-manipulated game that would alienate a lot of serious and well-intentioned people.

This latest nonsense is an example of "more harm than good." I generally don't rate, and I don't like being rated. How do we opt out of ratings? By joining the Silly raters? If so, where do I sign up?
Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to John Isner

Re: I can't rate??

by Jean-Pierre Pawlak -
In reply to John Isner

Re: I can't rate??

by Todd Thornton -

I'm with John on this. I normally don't get involved in these types of discussions, but I'd love to opt out of this insanity. I said this ratings system that didn't focus on solutions/fixes was silly here and I stand by my original comments. Interestingly, I just noticed when I was getting the link it had received positive ratings so my only ratings that I know of on Moodle are on a post about the ridiculous nature of the way the ratings were set up! (Ironic)

I believe that was the point of Steve's ratings that started this latest round of unfortunate events. I want to make it clear, I do not have (nor have I had a problem) with any of the people involved (Steve, Martin, Helen, etc.) so I don't have an ax to grind. They have all been helpful to me in the past in some way.

To point out the insanity of this system though, I would like to point out that I believe you have an employee of Moodle (Helen) (At least I believe I read that she was officially hired by Moodle headquarters a couple of months ago) who has given Martin D (essentially her boss if I'm correct) very high ratings on some of his posts. I have no doubt many of these ratings are well deserved, but has she ever given him a low rating? I doubt it although there's no way to search by ratings so I don't know for sure which is another reason I think this entire "ratings" exercise is pointless even if they were accurate which we all know they are not. Don't get me wrong. I'm not badmouthing Helen or Martin, I'm just pointing out the utter uselessness of an employee publicly rating her boss or people rating someone on whether they agree with their opinions or not. What would you say if you had to rate your boss on a forum? The same goes for Moodle Partners. I doubt Martin has given any of the partners poor ratings and I wouldn't expect him to because of their business relationship, but it doesn't mean their posts are any more or less useful than any other post that he does rate.

Ratings are one person's opinion that may be based on fact or fiction. They most likely (intentionally or unintentional) contain biases or in rare instances they may be completely objective, but ratings as they exist on Moodle are not helpful, they do not provide any useful information to anyone trying to figure out something on the forums, and as John says, they do more harm than good. Those are all very good reasons to admit they haven't worked as anticipated and get rid of them for good.

Todd