Gone to work for a couple weeks...

General use board for NAFHA-related items.

Moderators: Scott Waters, Don Becker

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 14th, 2011, 8:32 am

Shane_TX wrote:

I wonder how many Database participants are even worried about recognition? Nothing personal, but this is getting quite corny.

Shane
Shane, I suggest if you thinks its corny, then why bother with your posts? I think a Hanson fan club is corny, but I'm not wasting my time telling them on their forum (if there is one). Like Taylor said (Henry, not Hanson), "The idea brought up in this thread is just supposed to be for fun. People don't get paid for entering data. It's not the most exciting thing to do in the world. Adding an aspect of fun might make it more appealing for some."

So seriously man, do you need a girlfriend or something?

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 14th, 2011, 8:35 am

I'm totally on board with Nate's idea, then making the 50 the first threshold for acknowledgment on the forum. I still think this is a great idea.

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 14th, 2011, 11:40 am

Shane, if you can't add constructive remarks and ideas to NAFHA than please refrain from making comments.

Fundad

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 14th, 2011, 12:45 pm

brick911 wrote:
Shane_TX wrote:


So seriously man, do you need a girlfriend or something?

:lol:

Shane_TX
Posts: 603
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 5:44 pm
Location: Upper TX Coast

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

Post by Shane_TX » October 14th, 2011, 8:29 pm

Shane, if you can't add constructive remarks and ideas to NAFHA than please refrain from making comments.

Fundad
It was constructive. You should look at the use of the words "than and then"....also constructive.

Shane

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 14th, 2011, 9:21 pm

No... The things you said were just criticisms. I did not see anything constructive.

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 17th, 2011, 6:22 am

It was constructive. You should look at the use of the words "than and then"....also constructive.

Shane
Is that the best you got Shane? :lol: :lol: WEAK..

Bring on something a little more personal, if you want to get my attention..

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 17th, 2011, 7:09 am

Fundad wrote:
It was constructive. You should look at the use of the words "than and then"....also constructive.

Shane
Is that the best you got Shane? :lol: :lol: WEAK..

Bring on something a little more personal, if you want to get my attention..

Fundad
YEAH...Than you'll really get it... :lol: :lol: :lol: (sorry Brian... couldn't resist.) 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 17th, 2011, 7:23 am

:lol: :lol:

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 17th, 2011, 9:02 am

Shane, even though we still don't know for sure whether or not you are a NAFHA member - I assume you're not, otherwise you would probably have said so - I want to briefly respond to your criticisms:

1. Thank-you posts are corny: I definitely see what you mean. Here we are, grown men, slapping each other on the back and celebrating for entering a few finds in the database. That does have a certain corny element to it. The thing is, no one here seems to find it corny when people post their (often roadcruised) finds on the forum and everyone applauds and oohs and aahs. I am sure the majority of the non-herping American public would find THAT utterly ridiculous and corny, not to mention a huge waste of time (and gas). So, you might view my proposed thank-you posts simply as a way of adding an element of actual value to an otherwise downright corny activity we are already all engaging in - I just spent 5 hours roadcruising this weekend and plan to post pics soon :crazyeyes: :lol: )

2. People may not care about thank-you notes: Another good point. They may not. But many or most certainly also don't care about the contest, yet the contest has made a significant difference in the number of entries. One notable difference between the contest and the proposed thank-you posts is the amount of effort involved: To win the contest or come even close, people have to muster a super-human effort. To be recognized, all they have to do is hit a milestone. Gratification is immediate because thank-you posts wouldn't be awarded only once a year, but on an ongoing basis. Lastly, even if people don't care about not winning, they may well care about not being recognized while many others are. If you lose the contest, you are in the majority (as there is only one winner) and can take comfort in that. If you are not being recognized for reaching even a single milestone, you may well end up in the minority.


If this doesn't convince you, that's fine. But then, please respond in substance to what I just said. Don't just try to shoot it down with a one-liner. That's just not how constructive dialogue works.

Robert

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 17th, 2011, 12:26 pm

And now, back to the task at hand...


Someone was talking about stars?

Shane_TX
Posts: 603
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 5:44 pm
Location: Upper TX Coast

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

Post by Shane_TX » October 17th, 2011, 7:21 pm

Is that the best you got Shane? WEAK..

Bring on something a little more personal, if you want to get my attention..
Just trying to help. Forgive me if I don't have the time or will to read some Dale Carnegie before every forum post.

Yes, stars, we need to keep up with professionalism.

Shane

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 17th, 2011, 8:37 pm

Now that we have Shane's unhelpful responses out of the way.

I think its important to have stars for Species (Chris Harrison's species count is insane for example) and total counties (Curtis Hart and Mike Pingleton have a tremendous amount)

Maybe a 3 Tiered for star system....

I think this would help motivate county and species entries.

Fundad

Shane_TX
Posts: 603
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 5:44 pm
Location: Upper TX Coast

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

Post by Shane_TX » October 17th, 2011, 8:52 pm

Now that we have Shane's unhelpful responses out of the way.
Be fair, I wasn't trying to help the star idea :lol:

Shane

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, 8:55 am

I think its important to have stars for Species (Chris Harrison's species count is insane for example) and total counties (Curtis Hart and Mike Pingleton have a tremendous amount)

Maybe a 3 Tiered for star system....

I think this would help motivate county and species entries.
I tend to agree. I am just a bit concerned that the system may get too complicated. We certainly wouldn't want to add stars for counties and species to my proposed bronze-silver-gold star system.

A simple 3-tier system may work, but we would need to space apart the milestones that must be reached per star for number of entries, as I assume only 4-5 stars will fit in one row (well, unless we do multiple rows). That may mean that no star for number of entries can be awarded until a fairly high number has been reached (500? 1000?) AND?OR that no additional stars can be awarded after a certain number has been reached (2000?).

Does anyone have a specifc suggestion as to how to structure such a 3-tier system?

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, 9:02 am

Easy, Three rows..

Total Entries (Bronze, Silver, Gold)
Total Species (Same)
Total Counties (Same)

Fundad

It would be cool if would could add that to our FHF Profile online

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 18th, 2011, 9:05 am

I prefer to keep it simple. We could come up with a whole bunch of categories that people probably deserve credit for. We dont have to recognize it all. People who have alot of total species and total counties are also going to have alot of total entries.

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, 9:10 am

I prefer to keep it simple. We could come up with a whole bunch of categories that people probably deserve credit for. We dont have to recognize it all. People who have alot of total species and total counties are also going to have alot of total entries.
We have a ton of smart people here, I don't think a 3 tier system is complicated..

We are trying to motivate and acknowledge those putting in extra efforts for NAFHA. Many of us are traveling and chasing down whiptails 500 miles from home to get the data, some may just enter 2000 watersnakes in the same county.

Guys like Curtis Hart who don't enter large numbers, but travel about getting new counties should be acknowledged, IMO.

Fundad

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 18th, 2011, 9:23 am

We should come up with some crazy algorithm that nobody understands like a credit score. :thumb:

I'm cool with three tiers. Seems simple to me. If it was on our FHF profile under our avatar, it would really add to the motivation of people. It's just human nature, and we should take advantage of it for the database's sake. If people are herping and not putting their finds in, what a waste. Let's encourage 'em to wanna keep up with the Jones'.

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, 10:06 am

OK, Brian, but I am still not sure I understand what this would actually look like:

Row 1: 4 bronze stars + 4 silver stars + 4 gold stars (for number of entries)

Row 2: Same (for number of species)

Row 3: Same (for number of counties)

I.e.: a maximum of 36 stars in all? Isn't that a bit much? Will it even fit below the avatar?

If that's not what you have in mind, what exactly do you have in mind?

Robert

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, 10:46 am

I would suggest a number inside the star icon indicating how many of a particular type one has or a "x2", "x3", etc... next to the stars. Something like this would take up less space.

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, 10:49 am

Didn't realize you had some many levels for each type.

Let me respond later tonight when I have more time..

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, 11:02 am

spinifer wrote:I prefer to keep it simple. We could come up with a whole bunch of categories that people probably deserve credit for. We dont have to recognize it all. People who have alot of total species and total counties are also going to have alot of total entries.

There are some people who live in a big county and can't herp away very much, but have a lot of entries. They should be recognized. There are other people who don't have time to enter more than a few hundred entries, but who have worked hard to enter many different species from many different regions. They should also be recognized. So I do think there should be a few different categories.

I prefer to keep it simple too. I would rather have the following three categories:

Total entries: gold star for 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 entries
Total species: silver star for 20, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 300, 400 species
Total county records: bronze for 10, 25, 50, 100, 150, 200, 500, 1000 county records


I think encouraging additional county records is more significant than encouraging additional counties. I'll accept it either way though.

I don't really care which one gets gold/silver/bronze though. I don't want gold/silver/bronze for each category, because that would get too cluttered and confusing. I'd rather just have the stars sitting there on their own merit, have a thread announcing it when it starts, and just explain the system when anyone is curious enough to ask.

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 18th, 2011, 11:17 am

I like the number inside the star icon... good idea. That way we aren't limited by space.

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, 11:20 am

I think encouraging additional county records is more significant than encouraging additional counties
I somewhat disagree, because those that entered data at the beginning have many of the county records.

Fundad

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, 11:50 am

Following the idea of three rows, how about this:



Three rows:

En: ★★★★
Sp: ★★★★
Co: ★★★★


This would be for All Time Total Entries (En):

White

One white star: 1-49 records
Two white stars: 50-99 records
Three white stars: 100-149 records
Four white stars: 150-199 records

When a person reaches 200 records, all the white stars go away and you get a single bronze star. Then it would go:

Bronze

One bronze star: 200-399 records
Two bronze stars: 400-599 records
Three bronze stars: 600-799 records
Four bronze stars: 800-999 records

When a person reaches 1,000 records, all the bronze stars go away and you get a single silver star. Then it would go:

Silver

One silver star: 1,000-1,999 records
Two silver stars: 2,000-2,999 records
Three silver stars: 3,000-3,999 records
Four silver stars: 4,000-4,999 records

When a person reaches 5,000 records, all the silver stars go away and you get a single gold star. Then it would go:

Gold

One gold star: 5,000-9,999 records
Two gold stars: 10,000-14,999 records
Three gold stars: 15,000-19,999 records
Four gold stars: 20,000 records

We would have to decide on the values for species and counties, but do you guys like this system?

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, 12:03 pm

Yes, I, for one, really like it. Very crisp and clear. Nice work, Taylor :thumb:

In terms of milestones for species and counties (or county records), I'll let others weigh in. I really don't know what would make sense here.

Before we forget: Let's also think about more meaningful, i.e., herping-related, icons to replace stars. Something like frog, lizard, snake, with snake being the top level. The problem, I realize, is that not everyone will perceive a lizard or snake to outrank a frog. So, this specific example probably wouldn't work. But you get the idea. Let's hear some more suggestions along those lines.

Robert

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 18th, 2011, 12:18 pm

I almost love Taylor's idea. How about making the stars like a roman numeral system. I don't have time to expand on it right now. Hopefully, I'll get back on tonight and explain what I mean.

User avatar
JAMAUGHN
Posts: 1131
Joined: May 14th, 2011, 11:16 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Contact:

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

Post by JAMAUGHN » October 18th, 2011, 12:24 pm

I think this is a very good idea. While entering data in the database is its own reward :) , some recognition is nice, too, and might give some people added incentive.

I just hope that people's stars, or lack thereof, won't end up being used as a bludgeoning tool on the forum. That could ultimately undermine the effort. If people latch onto the stars as a means of preemptively discounting someone's opinions, that would be unfortunate. Besides, it's painful to be bludgeoned with stars. They're very pointy.

Seems like an acceptable risk, though.

JimM

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, 12:39 pm

I think that some differentiation in terms of who is talking may be a good thing. Sure, in the end what counts is what someone says, not how many stars he has. But knowing where others are in terms of their contributions to the database may also have a positive effect on what people say to each other in the first place. A little respect can be a good thing.

Robert

User avatar
M Wolverton
Posts: 424
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 1:46 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

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

Post by M Wolverton » October 18th, 2011, 12:53 pm

RobertH wrote:Yes, I, for one, really like it. Very crisp and clear. Nice work, Taylor :thumb:

In terms of milestones for species and counties (or county records), I'll let others weigh in. I really don't know what would make sense here.

Before we forget: Let's also think about more meaningful, i.e., herping-related, icons to replace stars. Something like frog, lizard, snake, with snake being the top level. The problem, I realize, is that not everyone will perceive a lizard or snake to outrank a frog. So, this specific example probably wouldn't work. But you get the idea. Let's hear some more suggestions along those lines.

Robert
Everyone who has not contributed gets a snot lizard.

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, 1:00 pm

I personally think that is a little complicated and the bar set too high for entries....

It would mean no one has a gold star.. :?

I think 2000 should be a gold standard, anyone with that many entries is going to continue entering data anyway...

Really busy today, I'll chime in more later

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 18th, 2011, 1:22 pm

Are 'stars' the most creative icon we mental powerhouses can come up with... :roll: How bout a crote rattle, going up to ten segments, and then starting up from the bottom again, with different colors to represent achievement levels... :D
Say...1 button for every ten entries...full 10 button rattle= 100. One silver button (from bottom up) for each following 100...full 10 button silver rattle= 1000. One gold button for each 1000...full 10 button gold rattle= 10,000.... should take a while for anyone to get that... :crazyeyes: :mrgreen: Those below the 1 button level get what's below the rattle... a Cloaca Icon. :D
then again... closest I ever came to a brainstorm was a light drizzle... :crazyeyes: :lol: :lol: jim

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, 2:05 pm

While the rattle idea is cool, I think it would be more difficult to implement. I really think stars would be fine... They are simple and get the point across. I feel like using anything other than symbols would start to get kind of corny for some. (if we even care about the corniness :lol: )


I changed the values so that the average person would be able to get to a gold level in a reasonable amount of time:


This would be for All Time Total Entries (En):

Bronze

One bronze star: 1-24 records
Two bronze stars: 25-49 records
Three bronze stars: 50-99 records
Four bronze stars: 100-124 records

When a person reaches 125 records, all the bronze stars go away and you get a single silver star. Then it would go:

Silver

One silver star: 125-249 records
Two silver stars: 250-499 records
Three silver stars: 500-999 records
Four silver stars: 1000-1999 records

When a person reaches 2,000 records, all the silver stars go away and you get a single gold star. Then it would go:

Gold

One gold star: 2,000-3,999 records
Two gold stars: 4,000-5,999 records
Three gold stars: 6,000-7,999 records
Four gold stars: 8,000 + records

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 18th, 2011, 2:40 pm

Taylor described it as I had imagined it, good work with the visual aids Taylor. :beer:

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, 2:45 pm

I like your new breakdown even better, Taylor. Very good.

In terms of stars vs. icons, you are probably right, Taylor, maybe we shouldn't get cute here. Jim's idea of colored buttons is actually very creative and I personally like it (because I happen to like crotes ;) ), but many others may not. So, I am going to change my vote and join you in proposing to stick with stars. Boring as they are, everyone knows what they mean and few will take issue with that standard choice.

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 18th, 2011, 2:56 pm

Fundad wrote:We have a ton of smart people here, I don't think a 3 tier system is complicated..

We are trying to motivate and acknowledge those putting in extra efforts for NAFHA. Many of us are traveling and chasing down whiptails 500 miles from home to get the data, some may just enter 2000 watersnakes in the same county.
Thats fine, I can go with the three tier system, but seriously then, why arent we adding number of DORs? You have always advocated how important those records are to the DB. Most people ignore DORs, why not credit those who actually stop? We dont even give them credit in the contest!
Gold ★

One gold star: 2,000-3,999 records
Two gold stars: 4,000-5,999 records
Three gold stars: 6,000-7,999 records
Four gold stars: 8,000 + records
As Jonathan eluded to, these values are awful high for number of counties and number of species. But I don't think its a good idea to have a different number system for each tier. We either need a number system that works for all 3 categories, or a different approach for species and counties.

User avatar
JAMAUGHN
Posts: 1131
Joined: May 14th, 2011, 11:16 pm
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Contact:

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

Post by JAMAUGHN » October 18th, 2011, 3:48 pm

I think that some differentiation in terms of who is talking may be a good thing. Sure, in the end what counts is what someone says, not how many stars he has. But knowing where others are in terms of their contributions to the database may also have a positive effect on what people say to each other in the first place. A little respect can be a good thing.

I agree.

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, 4:00 pm

why arent we adding number of DORs? You have always advocated how important those records are to the DB. Most people ignore DORs, why not credit those who actually stop? We dont even give them credit in the contest!
I'd have no problem with letting DORs count towards stars. Anyone disagree?
As Jonathan eluded to, these values are awful high for number of counties and number of species. But I don't think its a good idea to have a different number system for each tier. We either need a number system that works for all 3 categories, or a different approach for species and counties.
Yes, the milestones Taylor came up with for total entries won't work for species and counties. I don't think he meant to imply they do. But I don't think there are any milestones that will work for all three categories. We'll have to come up with different cutoffs for species/counties. If we post the milestones for each category clearly for all to see, there should be no confusion. As I said before, I would like others to propose specifics here. Fundad? Jonathan? Bob? Kyle?

Robert

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, 4:23 pm

I think the numbers have to be different for entries, species, and counties. More stars is better. When you enter more stuff, you get more stars. Everyone can figure that out. If they want to know how many exactly are needed for each level, it will be easy to look up. But getting over 50 species is pretty difficult for most people who don't travel, and getting over 400 is nearly impossible.

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 18th, 2011, 7:02 pm

"While the rattle idea is cool, I think it would be more difficult to implement. I really think stars would be fine... They are simple and get the point across. I feel like using anything other than symbols would start to get kind of corny for some. (if we even care about the corniness :lol: )"

Generally speaking, don't you gotta have like 4 stars, to boss everybody around? :lol: :lol: :lol: Just being corny, of course... :crazyeyes: (with some of my best word-play of the year :D )

Seriously though... 4 stars might be a bit cumbersome for the space allowed. Try this on... 1 blank 5-pointed star... one point filled in for each 20 entries.. full star=100, start again in silver... filled point for each 200...full star =1000. again in gold, filled point for 2 grand... full gold=10,000.
The values don't matter, (as long as divisible by 5). My point ( :roll: ) is... multi-star ratings are usually used to denote when something is better than something else. (Resturants, Movies, girls in my black book :) ) This would be JUST different enough to invoke curiosity,(what the hell does that slightly different star mean) and doesn't run the risk of people falsely assuming we're saying one person is 'better' than another.

We don't want that... :roll: food for thought We could even have a six-point star in increments of 6, for our Jewish members... :crazyeyes: :lol: :lol: jim

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, 7:45 pm



There you go Jim :lol:

Coloring the individual points would involve creating quite a few pictures. One other reason I like these stars, "★" , is because they are characters and really easy to manage.

You can make them

small:

big:

and even color them

There is a star outline if you really wanted to use that ☆

I still think the solid stars are perfect. I wouldn't be opposed to having more than four of them if everyone thinks that would be better...

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 18th, 2011, 8:18 pm

I don't know if it's my computer or what... but I don't see any stars... just boxes with 26 above 05... or am I going neutron (really dense{star}) :crazyeyes: Somebody STOP ME!!! :lol: I just don't want us to have to keep explaining that "more stars' DOESN'T mean 'better'... as in with the generally accepted meaning of multiple stars.
If that's a risk that everyone finds acceptable...then ok by me... :D jim

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, 8:44 pm

Oh, you must be using a really old internet browser... If its old enough that it isn't displaying the stars, its probably a good idea to update. If you need/want help, I can tell you how to update it.

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, 8:54 pm

My browser is updated and I dont see any stars..

:lol:
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, 8:57 pm

Google Chrome is showing the stars fine. :thumb:

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, 9:00 pm

Five Star system

Entries "Gold" 1=1 100=2 500=3 1,000=4 2,000=5

Species "Blue" 10=1 25=2 50=3 100=4 150=5

Counties "Red" 2=1 10=2 25=3 50=4 100=5


Simple
Fundad

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, 9:05 pm

Hmm, I checked it on Explorer 8 and Safari and it showed up. It might not be best to use them though if there are multiple people unable to view it. If we did decide to use stars, we may need to make them in a picture format, which isn't the end of the world...

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, 9:12 pm

Fundad wrote:Five Star system

Entries "Gold" 1=1 100=2 500=3 1,000=4 2,000=5

Species "Blue" 10=1 25=2 50=3 100=4 150=5

Counties "Red" 2=1 10=2 25=3 50=4 100=5

That is nice and simple...

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.

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, 9:15 pm

We want this to be fun. We want it to appeal to people. Humans respond way better to simple things than to complex things.

I'd rather not do a system where there are progressively different colors as you get to different levels, or where there are numbers inside the stars. That's just not as internally appealing.

More records = more stars. That seems natural to me. Keep it simple.

Post Reply