Gone to work for a couple weeks...

General use board for NAFHA-related items.

Moderators: Scott Waters, Don Becker

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:20 pm

I'm almost happy with Fundad's suggestion. But it feels like not enough levels.

Someone enters data. They're already on star 1. They only have 4 more stars to go, and they might feel the last two stars are out of reach. That means they only have 2 more stars to realistically acquire. Not much motivation.

I'd still like to go back to the 8 star idea. Two rows of four stars each as the max for each category. Since the stars would be different colors (I like Fundad's color choices), it wouldn't be confusing. And everyone would understand that more stars = more records.

Here would be my choices for the levels, to give everyone something reasonable to shoot for for the "next level" without making it too easy:

Total entries:
10
50
100
200
500
1000
2000
5000


Total species:
5
20
50
75
100
150
200
300


Total county records:
1
10
25
50
100
200
500
1000

Taylor Henry
Posts: 273
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:28 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Taylor Henry » October 18th, 2011, 9:21 pm

Makes sense. It would be simple, easier to implement, and even easier to understand.

Eight stars could probably even fit on one row if they are small enough.

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 18th, 2011, 9:25 pm

I would maybe go with a sixth star in this idea because 2,000 entries, as we have seen, can be entered in less than a year... Making a sixth star for 5,000 would let there be something else to strive for for the people who are already at 2,000 or going to reach it fairly soon.
Motivating those with 2000 entries is not the goal as motivating those entering that many is not necessary.. IMO
+ We could give anyone with all of those stars a label like "NAFHA Guide" or something like that..

Fundad

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 18th, 2011, 9:27 pm

imo those numbers are to high..


Fundad

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:38 pm

Fundad wrote:imo those numbers are to high..
You have five stars going up to 2,000 entries. I have seven stars that fit into that, and only 1 star that's higher.

You have five stars going up to 150 species. I have six stars that fit into that, and 2 that are higher.

My numbers aren't higher than yours, I just have more of them, both low and high.



The last category I'm doing country records instead of counties, so our numbers are different. Why motivate more counties? Isn't motivating more county records a more significant goal?

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:40 pm

One thing to remember - it would be nice if this system still was meaningful 2 or 3 or 5 years from now. It should work for someone when they join the forum as well as someone who still likes that motivation a few years in. We can think about how many entries people have now, but those numbers might be quite different a few years from now. I like having at least one number in each category that's difficult to attain in just one or two years.

Think of the person who enters 500 entries a year. Can't win a contest, so why not give them a star to shoot for even if they've already been entering data for four years?

RobertH
Posts: 1834
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:38 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by RobertH » October 18th, 2011, 9:43 pm

Hmm, I basically agree with your analysis and breakdowns, Jonathan, except that I somehow don't like the conclusion - eight different stars per category.

As you said, we want to keep it simple and appealing. If people have to use their index finger to count on the screen whether someone has 4, 5, 6 or stars below their avatar, the whole thing may become meaningless. In other words, it should be immediately apparent whether someone has entered 200 or 2000 records.

I also like Fundad's idea of using titles such as "NAFHA Guide" instead of stars (though I am still fine with stars). Any more suggestions of what, say, 5 titles would be?

Robert

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 18th, 2011, 9:45 pm

The last category I'm doing country records instead of counties, so our numbers are different. Why motivate more counties? Isn't motivating more county records a more significant goal?
Well those that started entering records first get all the love, not fair IMO, to newbies.. And an unbalanced system..

Counties IMO will lead to county records combined with species search.

Fundad

I think we want to have people like you, Nate etc maxed out.. and labeled as Data guides or something..

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:46 pm

That's why the stars shouldn't be in a single line. Two rows of four are very easy to count. Look at the following - 3, 8, 5, 2



XXX


XXXX
XXXX



XXXX
X



XX

User avatar
Owen
Posts: 1922
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 11:35 pm
Location: San Jose', Northern Catcrapistan

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Owen » October 18th, 2011, 9:50 pm

Time out :!:

Isn't this about entering records? Kill the counties, county records, etc...

Just do it by number of vouchered records. Plain and simple. Decide the plateaus and leave it at that. It shouldn't matter that you're Johnny Cash and have been everywhere, man. One record, one count, real simple.

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:51 pm

Fundad wrote:
The last category I'm doing country records instead of counties, so our numbers are different. Why motivate more counties? Isn't motivating more county records a more significant goal?
Well those that started entering records first get all the love, not fair IMO, to newbies.. And an unbalanced system..

There are an insane number of county records left to get. I just came out to one of the biggest cities in Canada in the middle of fall, and I've already got 9 county records in about 5 days of herping without leaving the county.

Take a look at this map. Almost everything is either blank or light green. Tons and tons of species left to get in most counties. And sure, the low-hanging fruit is gone from some areas - that's why we really need to motivate people to seek out those other areas:

http://www.naherp.com/maps/diversity.php

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:54 pm

Owen - it's also about having fun! Adding a couple more categories makes it funner. Some people really like to focus on county records. Someone in Montana or Canada might not be able to see all that many herps, but they could rack up a lot of county records. And for me, I'm most proud of how many different species I can find in a year - that's a lot more meaningful to me than the number of entries I churn out. So I think having the three categories makes it more fun and more interesting, and therefore more appealing.

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 18th, 2011, 9:55 pm

p.s. - I'm arguing my stances now because I like my ideas and think they're good ones, but I'm still favoring whatever the consensus is - so perhaps I will drop out now and let other people weigh in so we can find out what the group can agree on and come to a conclusion.

RobertH
Posts: 1834
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:38 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by RobertH » October 18th, 2011, 9:56 pm

OK, good, now I see what you mean, Jonathan. Sorry I didn't catch on sooner. Now it looks fine to me.

In terms of county records vs. county records, I tend to agree with Fundad: It's very hard to get county records for most of us at this point. For example, I have 10 counties and 58 species, but not a single county record to show for in CA. And it doesn't look like I'll enter a county record in CA anytime soon, either. Many other members in populated states like CA are in the same shoes. While county records certainly deserve recognition and lots of it, especially at this point, the star system may not be the best way to dole out that recognition. Maybe, we should come up with a separate system for that, for example a special thank-you post since we will be doing those anyway, we'd just need to add county records as an additional category.

Robert

RobertH
Posts: 1834
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:38 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by RobertH » October 18th, 2011, 9:58 pm

Owen - it's also about having fun! Adding a couple more categories makes it funner. Some people really like to focus on county records. Someone in Montana or Canada might not be able to see all that many herps, but they could rack up a lot of county records. And for me, I'm most proud of how many different species I can find in a year - that's a lot more meaningful to me than the number of entries I churn out. So I think having the three categories makes it more fun and more interesting, and therefore more appealing.
I agree with Jonathan (except that, as I said above, I favor total counties over county records).

Robert

User avatar
Biker Dave
Posts: 2844
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 6:56 pm
Location: Wittmann,AZ

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Biker Dave » October 18th, 2011, 10:12 pm

Great idea! Now lets hope the tech savvy among us can make it work reliably and preferably automatically.

User avatar
Owen
Posts: 1922
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 11:35 pm
Location: San Jose', Northern Catcrapistan

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Owen » October 18th, 2011, 10:19 pm

Robert, you just need to go out on January 1 and be the first into the database for yearly county records. I guess it's a race at the beginning. I'm not sure if 'county records' refers to the current year, or lifetime. My feelling is the bar resets each year and it's "What have you done for me lately".

I have 1 county, 7 county records, 25 2011 county records and 29 total species, but maybe a half dozen folks this year entering records in my home county.

Jonathan, since I don't need a contest to motivate me (I'm just trying to record as many species in my county in a given year), I'll leave myself out of the data point equation. Who knows, I may even make it out of the county next year :shock:

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 18th, 2011, 10:23 pm

IMO we have contests for the county records..

If someone is in a new county and searches for different species than county records will come naturally. Whats going to happen if you do county records is those who entered data first get the stars, not fair..

As far as the hard to reach goals and more stars IMO thats to much, and the contests we have cover those, for those "more inclined to enter data"

We just want a way to recognize and motivate those who can't win the contests, because they don't paint curbs all over the USA (IE Hubbs) But are contributing a ton, like Owen for example..

2000 records for someone married with kids, and a 60 work week with a limited budget, is a monster number to reach.. For a single guy with a gravy job 2000 is just a serious commitment in time..

We have only have a handful of 2000 record holders after how many years?

Again we dont want to redo the contests we just want to give recognition to those contributing to us.

Thats my take on it anyway.. having a 5000 top goal will not motivate me, the data motivates me at this point and time.

Owen,
I understand what your saying, (which is why I want to keep it low numbered), and I used to think like you when I first started, than I started having fun looking for species I used to have NO interest in, and that changed my herping for me, and brought me enjoyment in species and herp trips that I never used to have. Furthermore I had to learn how to herp for these other species and even take trips to look for things like salamanders/lizards etc that I would have never tried for if it wasn't for the NAFHA goals..

Fundad

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 2:46 am

What was wrong with Taylor's original idea on stars, with bronze, silver and gold for total entries? If you want to motivate people you need to make upgrading the stars an easy thing to do. If there are only 8 stars total then its harder to upgrade to the next level. People want to see a change on their profile. Thats what motivates.

For counties and species, I think we can use the same scale 10=1 25=2 50=3 75=4 bronze, 100, 125, 150, 175 silver, 200, 225, 250, 275 gold.

Jonathan, I agree with the others, total counties is better than county records. its an unfair category because those who have been here longer have more county records available to get. Unless you do personal county records :)

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 5:08 am

Why are you yelling so early in the morning Nate? :lol: :lol:

Fundad

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 5:15 am

Sorry, didnt want my point to get lost in the text. :D

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 5:40 am

Sorry, didnt want my point to get lost in the text. :D
:lol: :D

Fundad

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 5:49 am

Personally I think the bar is set to high, and some of the Conservative data entering people will be in the same boat as the contests. With unreachable goals..

We don't want to replace the contests.. There is no one that I can think of in the 1500 + entry class that needs motivation.

It would be nice if we had a handful of people that "reached" the end and we can label that person as such for his/her accomplishments and IMO those are the people most involved in correcting errors in the database and involved in discussions.

Why would someone listen to someone that isn't even half way?

The end goals should be reasonable with a good effort..(not easy) IMO..

We have contests to motivate the others..

This is just my opinion, trying to motivate those that think they could never win the contest and recognizing them when they do enter the data.

entering data is addictive and once a person gets in the 1500 plus range they become data crackheads.. :lol: :lol: :crazyeyes:

Fundad

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 6:08 am

Fundad wrote:Personally I think the bar is set to high, and some of the Conservative data entering people will be in the same boat as the contests. With unreachable goals..
I dont know what you are referring to. You are saying 100 data entry increments to earn bronze stars is too much?

You cant look at just the final (highest) achievement. Placing that too low, devalues the work of those that put in a lot of effort, and I think gives the impression that we are striving for mediocracy. If you have many achievable steps to reach a goal (Roberts original idea), you can build people up while giving them a sense of accomplishment along the way. Its like playing a video game, the more you play, the better you become so you stop playing on "easy" mode and move to "advanced". When you first start entering data you earn a star (bronze) for every 100 entries, then as you get better, you earn star (silver) for every 500 entries, etc.

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 6:19 am

I don't think it will work but try it your way.. Those with over 1500 entries are already "POUNDING" the database with more..

its those with 300 entries that have stopped entering data because they cant catch anyone in the contest that we are trying to reach, not those who enter data like you and I.



Fundad

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 6:35 am

Fundad wrote:its those with 300 entries that have stopped entering data because they cant catch anyone in the contest that we are trying to reach, not those who enter data like you and I.
With this system they dont need to catch anyone. They merely need to work towards the goal of adding another star.

User avatar
brick911
Posts: 3488
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:52 am
Location: Morrisville, PA

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by brick911 » October 19th, 2011, 7:03 am

spinifer wrote:
Fundad wrote:its those with 300 entries that have stopped entering data because they cant catch anyone in the contest that we are trying to reach, not those who enter data like you and I.
With this system they dont need to catch anyone. They merely need to work towards the goal of adding another star.
I agree with you Nate.

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 7:13 am

Setting Goals and being hired to set goals is one of the things I do for a living..

I 'll step out and let you guys work out your system, as this wasn't what I had in mind when it was brought up in the cali contest link.

Fundad

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by hellihooks » October 19th, 2011, 7:17 am

spinifer wrote: People want to see a change on their profile. Thats what motivates.
GOOD MORNING NATE :lol: :lol:

I agree that it should be about motivation, and people will like seeing changes. And, given too many stars may become unwieldy, I again suggest taking advantage of the inherent properties of a Star...Start with a pentagram/triangle outline in the shape of a 5-point star... each level you reach fills in one arm (triangle) on the star...major threshold (100, 1000. ect) are reached when the star is filled in.
This provides a visual motivation to complete each star... and at whichever level one is at... it's easier (and more fun) to work towards filling in your stars, than earning a whole star outright. And arguable more precise...when you can say "I have 2 4/5 stars", rather than "I'm working towards my third." Not that important at the lower levels, but as you go up the incremental scale, I think this method sustains motivation.
And, I don't think we should hand out the stars too freely. The 1st star (of course) should be easy... each arm=20, full star=100
2nd star (SLV) hard... each arm=200 full star=1000
3rd star.(GLD)crazy hard to fill... each arm=2000 full star=10,000
Remember too... this is not 3 separate stars... this is ONE star that covers 0-10,000, by filling in arms and changing colors. Do this for each category, for a total of 3(?) stars.
Think about it... (specially the guy writing 2 dozen thank you notes a month) 1st star easy enough to motivate new data entry.
Silver star very note worthy, for one year (hell... I might up my goal from 730, to 1000, to earn a full silver star... :crazyeyes: )
Gold... crazy hard... could take even Fundad 5 yrs to fill... but gives him the smaller goal of one arm a year.... :thumb:
Too many stars... they become blase... a full silver or even ONE gold arm REALLY stands out, as a rare and noteworthy accomplishment.... It's all about supply and demand... the MORE stars there are, the less they will be valued... and when someone eventually earns the 1st full gold star... then...WOW! Less is more people... Less is more... :thumb: jim

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 7:27 am

Fundad,

You don't need to bow out. If you better explain your stance and what you dont agree with I might understand your opinion, at the moment I do not.

You said:
Fundad wrote:
Do we need an "Achievement Unlocked" type thing like on the xbox?

Thats a Great Idea
How is what Robert proposed (working towards an achievable goal and being rewarded with a star), not like the "great idea" someone mentioned above?

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 7:34 am

Jim wrote:Start with a pentagram/triangle outline in the shape of a 5-point star... each level you reach fills in one arm (triangle) on the star...major threshold (100, 1000. ect) are reached when the star is filled in.
This provides a visual motivation to complete each star... and at whichever level one is at... it's easier (and more fun) to work towards filling in your stars, than earning a whole star outright. And arguable more precise...when you can say "I have 2 4/5 stars", rather than "I'm working towards my third." Not that important at the lower levels, but as you go up the incremental scale, I think this method sustains motivation.
This concept is essentially the same as Taylor suggested. But instead of filling in 1 star, you earn up to 4 stars of the same color before moving on to the next. I think for a star that will probably be the same size as the text on the screen, filling one in will be hard to see.

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by hellihooks » October 19th, 2011, 7:48 am

The difference might be like between reading a clock vs counting stars... plus... my method avoids the problem of 'MORE= Better' that IS already well-established. EVERYBODY has one star... that reads like a clock. And like a clock, the triangular arms can be subdivided easily into more thinner triangles... you could theoretically put 100 triangular slices into the first Star... so it would change WITH EACH entry... :D jim

RobertH
Posts: 1834
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:38 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by RobertH » October 19th, 2011, 7:59 am

OK, I am lost.

There seem to be at least two points of contention:

1. Total counties vs. county records

2. How many stars vs. arms/colors of stars?

3. Other issues????

Please let's try to identify exactly what we are arguing about before we go on. My sense is that the last 50 posts or so accomplished very little and may have actually moved us backward, i.e., we are even less clear now on what we want than we were 2 days ago.

Robert

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 8:11 am

1. Total counties vs. county records

2. How many stars vs. arms/colors of stars?

3. Other issues????
Heres where I stand

1. Total counties

2. I like Taylor's suggestion best

3. Fundad. :crazyeyes: :crazyeyes: :crazyeyes: :lol: :lol: :crazyeyes:

User avatar
kyle loucks
Posts: 3148
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 12:40 am
Location: Pennsylvania- Bucks Co. near Phila.

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by kyle loucks » October 19th, 2011, 8:19 am

Why dont we display the number of records under the number of posts under the names?

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 19th, 2011, 8:31 am

Okay, I'll step back in briefly just to reiterate a few things:

1) We're looking to create incentives, not bragging rights. That's why we're trying to create goals. Finding creative ways for people to demonstrate how many records they have (whether it's rotating star arms or a straight number) doesn't do that.


2) Humans like simple motivations. The more complex we make the recognition, the less motivating it's going to be.


3) Populating the database is our main goal. We should make sure we consider what the database needs.

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by hellihooks » October 19th, 2011, 8:35 am

'Efficiency' has always been a 'pet' hobby of mine... hell... I trained myself to brush my teeth and comb my hair at the same time, because it will save me 3 hrs a year, and 120 hrs (3 work weeks) over the remainder of my life.
I pride my self on always finding the best way to do things, and am used to others not seeing things the way I do. No biggi. This is a great concept... stars are good, and I'm ok with whatever the majority decides. Final word from me...
1) Less is more
2) space saving
3) exponetial scale better than straight numerical counting
4) avoids established more=better paradigm.
5) possibly more motivational

I'm a firm believer that anything worth doing should be done as well as possible, and I was just trying to help/contribute. If the majority decides that multiple stars is good enough... then good enough for me. I will sleep well, knowing I gave the best I had to offer, and that's ALL that matters to me... :thumb: jim

User avatar
spinifer
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:48 am
Location: Delmarva

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by spinifer » October 19th, 2011, 8:53 am

jonathan wrote:Okay, I'll step back in briefly just to reiterate a few things:

1) We're looking to create incentives, not bragging rights. That's why we're trying to create goals. Finding creative ways for people to demonstrate how many records they have (whether it's rotating star arms or a straight number) doesn't do that.


2) Humans like simple motivations. The more complex we make the recognition, the less motivating it's going to be.


3) Populating the database is our main goal. We should make sure we consider what the database needs.
1. What was your suggestion then? I thought providing the stars was creating an incremental approach while providing a sense of achievement for each level attained.

2. & 3. Agreed.

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 19th, 2011, 9:10 am

Yes, Nate, I'm in favor of the stars. I'm in favor of any system where something concrete is "earned" when you hit a new level. I was arguing against just putting the number of entries there, or using rotating star arms or anything else that didn't clearly indicate a new achievement with a new level.

I still would prefer just a straight number of stars, rather than progressively changing color, but if the majority wants it than I'm fine with it.


Oh, since everyone's listing their creds, I've taken four courses in psychology, have a master's degree in education and taught for 6 years, then worked in nonprofit management. Got quite a bit of experience in motivational theory and setting goals. :crazyeyes: :lol: :thumb:

User avatar
brick911
Posts: 3488
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:52 am
Location: Morrisville, PA

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by brick911 » October 19th, 2011, 9:21 am

I dropped out of nursing school because I realized that touching people grosses me out. Now I work with my father for decent compensation and I do a good job, but I hate it.

For the record, I'm completely fine with whatever you guys come up with. Whether its 6 colors of stars, rotating armed stars, numbers, or rattles. I think its a good, solid idea and the rest is just details.

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by hellihooks » October 19th, 2011, 9:25 am

jonathan wrote: Oh, since everyone's listing their creds, I've taken four courses in psychology, have a master's degree in education and taught for 6 years, then worked in nonprofit management. Got quite a bit of experience in motivational theory and setting goals. :crazyeyes: :lol: :thumb:
And still look like a 19 yr old... :crazyeyes: good living I guess... :lol: :lol:
One thought... If we do have up to three categories, and up to 4 stars for each category, rather than one star changing color... thatsa lotta stars... :crazyeyes: And just so I'm clear... these stars go on the avatar space? jim

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 19th, 2011, 9:26 am

brick911 wrote:I dropped out of nursing school because I realized that touching people grosses me out.
:lol:

User avatar
jonathan
Posts: 3634
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by jonathan » October 19th, 2011, 9:28 am

hellihooks wrote:
jonathan wrote: Oh, since everyone's listing their creds, I've taken four courses in psychology, have a master's degree in education and taught for 6 years, then worked in nonprofit management. Got quite a bit of experience in motivational theory and setting goals. :crazyeyes: :lol: :thumb:
And still look like a 19 yr old... :crazyeyes: good living I guess... :lol: :lol:
Yah, I'm fine with that. I could use my high school pictures as ID still and no one would notice.

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by hellihooks » October 19th, 2011, 9:42 am

brick911 wrote:I dropped out of nursing school because I realized that touching people grosses me out.

For the record, I'm completely fine with whatever you guys come up with. Whether its 6 colors of stars, rotating armed stars, numbers, or rattles. I think its a good, solid idea and the rest is just details.
I know that feeling... I'm a certified Drug and Alcohol Counselor who can no longer stand to be around tweekers or drunks... :roll:
The rest of what you said... :thumb: :thumb: :thumb: jim
Oh... and I have a DEGREE in psych...and worked as a Suppelmental Instructor at the college level, in several subjects, but primarily Critical Thinking... ;)

RobertH
Posts: 1834
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:38 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by RobertH » October 19th, 2011, 9:45 am

Still not sure what all of the issues are, and don't have time right now to be more detailed.

1. Star vs. arms of stars issue: I prefer straightforward stars, specifically as set out by Taylor yesterday (or was it the day before?). Sorry, Jim.

2. Counties vs. county records: Since we have problems agreeing on counties vs. county records, and everyone agrees that we should keep it simple, I'd propose to go back to the original idea of awarding stars JUST FOR TOTAL ENTRIES. To recognize species, counties, and/or county records, we could simply include those categories in the thank-you post system. That would make for a clean and straightforward, single-row star system (as designed by Taylor). But I do see the reason for three rows and would be fine with that as well.

Robert

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 9:47 am

For the most part Nate we only disagree on the goal setting numbers.

Some of those numbers you want to put up are unreachable, even by me IMO..

I want reasonable goals that lead to a title of somekind..

Something 20%+ of our members can reach with a reasonable effort.

Thats the basic difference in our opinion. Outside of my suggestion being a little simpler.

Fundad

hellihooks
Posts: 8025
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:12 am
Location: Hesperia, California.
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by hellihooks » October 19th, 2011, 9:49 am

Works for me. :D jim

RobertH
Posts: 1834
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:38 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by RobertH » October 19th, 2011, 9:51 am

OK, thanks, Brian.

So, the third issue is where we make the cutoffs. Is there agreement on the cutoffs for any of the three categories? Or are all of them disputed? If the latter is the case, that would be another reason to opt for a single-category (total entries) system and try to reach agremeent at least on that one category.

Robert

User avatar
Fundad
Posts: 5721
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:11 am
Location: Los Angeles County
Contact:

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Fundad » October 19th, 2011, 9:58 am

the third issue is where we make the cutoffs. Is there agreement on the cutoffs for any of the three categories? Or are all of them disputed? If the latter is the case, that would be another reason to opt for a single-category (total entries) system and try to reach agremeent at least on that one category.
Personally I think 2,000 should be the top of the line.. If a few members reach that total in a year and half, so be it.. 2000 is a lot of work and effort.. 3,000 is ok too, but imo thats a hard number to reach unless one starts photoing lizards and frogs at every corner. some people only like to enter snakes and stuff, and since I am the snake leader at around 1900 total snake enteries reaching 2000 total entries is a lot for some people that have limited time, $$$, family, resources etc.

Fundad

But its not my call Jon, Nate, Taylor etc seem to want more to reach the top..So I am outvoted here.. :thumb:

Taylor Henry
Posts: 273
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 7:28 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Gone to work for a couple weeks...

Post by Taylor Henry » October 19th, 2011, 10:13 am

I have no preference and will be happy with whatever is decided on. As we have tried to establish, the main goal is to motivate data entry. We could always do a trial run and see how it goes. If we find that there are some things that can be improved on, then we can do so.

One thing to consider: if someone has to be motivated by stars, they are looking for some sort of awknowledgement or bragging rights. Once they have achieved all there is to achieve, where will their motivation go? Will they stop entering data? Slow down significantly?

I don't know if that really is how it would go, but I could see it being like that...

As for the two issues Robert has listed:

1. I vote solid stars

2. I vote total counties if we do multiple tiers, but I am also alright with a single line of stars.

Post Reply