Talk:Project management suggestions - Revision history

BryanDerksen: /* Ratings */

2010-02-08T17:02:19Z

‎Ratings

Proleric1 at 18:14, 6 February 2010

2010-02-06T18:14:23Z

Snoteye at 10:07, 6 February 2010

2010-02-06T10:07:37Z

E.C.Patterson: /* Ratings */

2010-02-05T23:25:23Z

‎Ratings

Proleric1 at 14:15, 2 February 2010

2010-02-02T14:15:18Z

Proleric1 at 14:14, 2 February 2010

2010-02-02T14:14:54Z

Proleric1 at 14:14, 2 February 2010

2010-02-02T14:14:20Z

Proleric1: Created page with '== Ratings == ~~~~ The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the result...'

2010-02-02T13:56:04Z

Created page with '== Ratings == ~~~~ The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the result...'

New page

== Ratings ==
[[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 13:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC) The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the results. So, anything voted 9+ is probably good - a very useful thing to know - but being #1 in the rankings rather than #10 is probably meaningless. I'm not sure what the latest research says about these things, but I suspect a slightly simpler system would be better - for example, a scale 1-10 (with no .25 intervals) and no guidelines on what the scores mean. NWVault calculates the average ranking by a complicated algorithm, which is open to troll voting. IMO it would be fairer to rank on the median score. It's useful to see a histogram of the scores, too, e.g. http://proleric.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=39&start=0&view=viewpoll. Some people dismiss the voting system as a measure of how many friends you have, but I think that's too cynical - as long as you just see it as a way of sorting sheep from goats, and nothing more.

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 :[[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] Good point. I've promoted it to the suggestion page.
 == Captchas (removal of) ==
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Proleric approves +10

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 :Why is this on the discussion page and not the suggestion page? Meseems it is a relevant point of consideration. [[User:Snoteye|Snoteye]] 10:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 == Captchas (removal of) ==
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Proleric approves +10

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 13:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC) The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the results. So, anything voted 9+ is probably good - a very useful thing to know - but being #1 in the rankings rather than #10 is probably meaningless. I'm not sure what the latest research says about these things, but I suspect a slightly simpler system would be better - for example, a scale 1-10 (with no .25 intervals) and no guidelines on what the scores mean. NWVault calculates the average ranking by a complicated algorithm, which is open to troll voting. IMO it would be fairer to rank on the median score. It's useful to see a histogram of the scores, too, e.g. http://proleric.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=39&start=0&view=viewpoll. Some people dismiss the voting system as a measure of how many friends you have, but I think that's too cynical - as long as you just see it as a way of sorting sheep from goats, and nothing more.
---[[User:E.C.Patterson|E.C.Patterson]] 23:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC) Agreed.
+:--[[User:E.C.Patterson|E.C.Patterson]] 23:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC) Agreed.
 == Captchas (removal of) ==
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Proleric approves +10

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 == Ratings ==
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 13:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC) The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the results. So, anything voted 9+ is probably good - a very useful thing to know - but being #1 in the rankings rather than #10 is probably meaningless. I'm not sure what the latest research says about these things, but I suspect a slightly simpler system would be better - for example, a scale 1-10 (with no .25 intervals) and no guidelines on what the scores mean. NWVault calculates the average ranking by a complicated algorithm, which is open to troll voting. IMO it would be fairer to rank on the median score. It's useful to see a histogram of the scores, too, e.g. http://proleric.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=39&start=0&view=viewpoll. Some people dismiss the voting system as a measure of how many friends you have, but I think that's too cynical - as long as you just see it as a way of sorting sheep from goats, and nothing more.
 == Captchas (removal of) ==
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Proleric approves +10

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 13:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC) The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the results. So, anything voted 9+ is probably good - a very useful thing to know - but being #1 in the rankings rather than #10 is probably meaningless. I'm not sure what the latest research says about these things, but I suspect a slightly simpler system would be better - for example, a scale 1-10 (with no .25 intervals) and no guidelines on what the scores mean. NWVault calculates the average ranking by a complicated algorithm, which is open to troll voting. IMO it would be fairer to rank on the median score. It's useful to see a histogram of the scores, too, e.g. http://proleric.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=39&start=0&view=viewpoll. Some people dismiss the voting system as a measure of how many friends you have, but I think that's too cynical - as long as you just see it as a way of sorting sheep from goats, and nothing more.
-== Captchas ==
+== Captchas (removal of) ==
 [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Proleric approves +10

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:14, 2 February 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Ratings ==		== Ratings ==
	[[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 13:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC) The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the results. So, anything voted 9+ is probably good - a very useful thing to know - but being #1 in the rankings rather than #10 is probably meaningless. I'm not sure what the latest research says about these things, but I suspect a slightly simpler system would be better - for example, a scale 1-10 (with no .25 intervals) and no guidelines on what the scores mean. NWVault calculates the average ranking by a complicated algorithm, which is open to troll voting. IMO it would be fairer to rank on the median score. It's useful to see a histogram of the scores, too, e.g. http://proleric.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=39&start=0&view=viewpoll. Some people dismiss the voting system as a measure of how many friends you have, but I think that's too cynical - as long as you just see it as a way of sorting sheep from goats, and nothing more.		[[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 13:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC) The NWVault rating system is good, but any competent statistician will tell you that the sample size is far too small to make detailed judgements on the results. So, anything voted 9+ is probably good - a very useful thing to know - but being #1 in the rankings rather than #10 is probably meaningless. I'm not sure what the latest research says about these things, but I suspect a slightly simpler system would be better - for example, a scale 1-10 (with no .25 intervals) and no guidelines on what the scores mean. NWVault calculates the average ranking by a complicated algorithm, which is open to troll voting. IMO it would be fairer to rank on the median score. It's useful to see a histogram of the scores, too, e.g. http://proleric.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=39&start=0&view=viewpoll. Some people dismiss the voting system as a measure of how many friends you have, but I think that's too cynical - as long as you just see it as a way of sorting sheep from goats, and nothing more.
		+
		+	== Capchas ==
		+	[[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Proleric approves +10