Is this a miscalculation with the Leaderboard?
I tried this out with Sunday's sponsored deals. If you are able to vote on all of the sponsored deals when they are just voted, regardless of whether you like them, you will appear on the "Top Early Adopters". I did this and I was # 7 (I think).
There should be a minimum number of votes cast to qualify on this ranking field. Maybe 10 or 15.
by
sgoman5674
asked 2 years ago
I was playing around with this the other day - just out of curiosity.
When I voted within the first few seconds after the new Sponsored deals appeared I made it on to the leaderboard that day. When I waited only about 5 minutes (so dozens of people still voted after me) I didn't make it on to the leaderboard.
That makes me wonder if the leaderboard only shows the first 15 people to vote on the sponsored deals on any given day.
I thought about this a few weeks ago too. I had voted on the Sponsored deals right after they were posted. Same thing happened to my stats and I thought I had discovered a glitch in the system. Was going to write to the Staff until I re-read something somewhere (yeah, I know, not real helpful) that the leaderboard stats where partially calculated from the Community deals. Some how the Sponsored deals are left out of the equation. After I read that, I was glad I hadn't written the email because I have a hard enough time trying not to look like a total noob. But now I see that maybe there actually is a way to get around the algorithm? Boo on that.
I can't find where I read the info about what was figured into the algorithm. I'll dig around. It's in a FAQ maybe?
early top adopters include more than just the sponsored deals. You should be voting on all deals.
@lavikinga: It was in front of my nose the whole time! From the Early Adopters Board itself:
"Where they vote, others follow: the average number of votes cast after their votes on community deals."
Says nothing about the Sponsored Deals, so I guess I assumed voting on them didn't count. And you know the old adage about assuming...
@hobbit, @lavikinga: I'm pretty sure that I didn't vote for many, if any, community deals the day I was playing with this and made the leaderboard.
I agree it should omit sponsored deals, but I am - and I think @sgoman5674 is - wondering if it really does.
@hobbit: well not ALL the deals, but all the deals and comments that you like and agree with, but most of you knew what I meant.
I think it includes them. But if that is all you vote for then you quickly get knocked off the top adopter list. It seems to move quickly.
Based on my limited understanding, it is based on the average number of votes after yours.
So the more you vote, the lower your average is. Also the number of votes after your's effects it as well. So if there are no more votes after you, then that lowers the average which could be a lot if you don't vote a lot. For instance, if you only vote 4 times on a deal but no one votes after you on one of them you lower your average by approximately 25% (not sure on this percentage).
This applies to all of the deals. I just used the sponsored deals as they are the most consistently voted upon.
I can confirm that Top Early Adopters excludes Sponsored Deals from the calculations. It only applies to popular community deals that have been added within the last 24 hours.
[edit] Also, the vote must have been cast before the deal is made popular.
@anotherhiggins: no it doesn't omit sponsored deals.
I think there should be a minimum # votes cast on deals. Sponsored deals are deals too.
@josefresno: thats good to know about casting the vote before popular. Are there any other inputs into the equation that effect your average, besides other votes that is?
@sgoman5674: One thing I like about it is that it is an average, so it will hopefully award strategic voting on the fresh tab.
@sgoman5674: Well if it doesn't exclude the sponsored deals, then one really can game the system if they judge quickly & correctly the deal is gonna pop quickly in votes. Right? And that would including being johnny-on-the-mark for the fresh community deals as well.
edit-- at the risk of showing ignorance, are any of you staff? REALLY wish there were badges or SOMETHING to let me know without having to ask. It's not that it would discount any one's comment, but it would help me to recognize comments that probably should be considered to carry more weight.
@lavikinga: So far only @josefresno is staff. Everyone else is like you and me, a wooter.
well since we are on the subject, how does this all affect the reputation. Do folks voting on our deals or just our comments go into reputation or all of the above?
@hobbit: I'd like to know as well.
@hobbit: Reputation is a bit trickier and more subject to change in the future, it is generally site-wide and is loosely based on the average number of votes that other wooters have cast for things that you post.
@josefresno: You know I'm fond of you, but I'd bet against you on the sponsored deal thing. I know, I know, you guys are the ones that WROTE this, but two different days, just for sport, I voted up ONLY the sponsored deals, and all five of them, and then nothing else for eight hours. In both cases I was a high scoring early adopter. The first time I did it just out of curiosity, and the second time, to verify.
I then went back (after that) to only voting on those #sponsored things that I actually thought were worthy, but I agree here with @anotherhiggins. It may have been the intent not to count them, but somehow they're being counted, just the same.
I could go on, but I'll stop here.
@hobbit: Throw me into the dogpile that wants to know.
I STILL can't figure out how the little (in my opinion) I've contributed in relation to other names I see on deals.woot has given me the rep score I have (not naming names, as I'm bound to leave many out, but you busy bees know who you are).
This squirrely algorithm has not only landed me on the leaderboard in several categories for more than a day or two, but also had me going from a score of zero to ninety in a heartbeat by only asking a question or two, adding a few really stupid deals and making comments.
How many different woot accounts are active on deals.woot in a 24 hour period? And how many of them vote, post deals, and comment? Any way for us to get a basic drift of traffic patterns here?
@josefresno: "It only applies to popular community deals that have been added within the last 24 hours."
This is absolutely true, and I've personally verified it. You can vote all day for stuff that's old, and have other people come in and vote after you, and it will make no different at all.
"Also, the vote must have been cast before the deal is made popular."
Also true. Also verified. The more votes that happen after you've voted directly affect your ranking on the leaderboard, but you won't get on the leaderboard at all unless your vote happened before that moment when it went to the Popular tab, preferable as the first vote after the item is posted on Fresh.
@lavikinga: I think something about quality working into that, all your posts and deals get voted on, or most. Other busy bees have the quantity factor thing going hence their high score, which might be a bad thing.
@shrdlu: We will keep an eye on it.
@shrdlu: So if ones object is only to make the leaderboard rather than just be a contributor, it boils down to it being a game of timing, chance and good fortune?
@lavikinga: Much of the contributions that seem to contribute to reputation have to do with comments, and how useful they are. I don't think you can affect your own reputation by downvoting (it seems like either @wootvan or @anotherhiggins already tried that), but absolutely, someone else downvoting multiple items, especially comments, can pull reputation down, and voting those same types of things up, can push it up.
@josefresno or @shawnmiller: I recognize that this comment may be pointing things out more clearly than you might like. I will not be at all offended or upset if this comment is deleted when you read it, but it would be nice if you just replace it with DELETED or something similar, so that I don't think I'm losing what's left of my mind.
@hobbit: The bees are what keeps the hive happening! I know I'm grateful to have them buzzing in the trees.
@lavikinga: I guess this is mostly related to the calculations being averaged. Most all of your postings have generally received good responses from the community.
@lavikinga: I've spent 40+ years gaming the system. Some of what goes on here is certainly due to chance, and it's easier to affect the fortunes of others (when speaking of reputation) in minor ways, than oneself. That said, "reputation" on Deals does not equate (and I'm sure no one is saying it does) with what we think of as reputation in life. If it did, then @catbertthegreat would be at the top. I am absolutely NOT kidding on this.
@josefresno: While you're paying attention to us, do you ever consider having tattling figured into reputation? It seems to me that it ought to, somehow. In addition, when someone posts deals that they haven't really verified, and then turn out to be crazy messes like that Edmond Scientific one, shouldn't that make a difference somehow?
[I mention that one because it's the easiest for me to remember]
@shrdlu: In my mind, ones good reputation at anything has always been won by hard work & contributions. Seeing mine shoot up without a seemingly large amount of effort it made me wonder if the bar was set very low, it was an unreported glitch, I was hanging with a bunch of slackers or that there was an unseen switch being toggled by our certain contributions both good & bad.
@shrdlu: I think it should be to some degree. Especially if some posters are continually posting bad deals, or staff is having to fix their links because they are wrong or don't work.
@lavikinga: Well, hanging with us slackers was certainly a part of it, yes.
@hobbit: I'm a fan of the carrot and stick approach, too. When we see someone posting deals over and over with comments like "hope those coupons work, let me know" and "oops, sorry, that deal doesn't work" it seems a bit unfair. I don't mean just unfair to those people who are looking at the deal, but for the other people who are also posting deals, and may not get the audience they want because they got pushed off page 1 on the Fresh tab.
@shrdlu: People that post deals from their website and their website only some how bother me as well. I understand they were given the ok to put up their deals, but some how seeing them post 5 or 6 at a time and taking up half a page on Fresh seems some how wrong. Trying to be a team playing here but the little voice just won't shut the hell up.
@lavikinga: Staff has actually asked them privately and publicly to only post 2-3 a day.
@hobbit: Really? Must have been recently.
I seem to remember one of the sellers that either you or @shrdlu had a bit of a "chat" with had loaded quite a few deals recently. Enough that it made me a bit peevish that I had to click the "next" button to see the actual Fresh deals. It think it may have been with @shrdlu because I remember she corrected his assumption that she was a he. Oh yeah! Now I remember! It was the guy who announced he ha lowered his s/h!
off to search for the name.
@lavikinga: Can't find the exchange of wittiness but I do remember it was this bk industries guy who was stacking the deals up.
@lavikinga: its @bkindustries and the link to the thread is:
@lavikinga: some retailers choose to ignore staff.
@hobbit: Yes, some retailers do indeed ignore staff, and others. Perhaps they like talking to the BBB instead (yes, I am loads of fun).
[Edit] While I'm thinking about it, I'll tell you one Leaderboard thing that I haven't a prayer of gaming. That would be the "Top Questioners" since it's just an average of votes divided by the questions that user has had. Hah! I've asked all sorts of questions that I didn't WANT to see voted up, in some cases because I wanted to keep the conversation on Fresh, and in others because the question itself was ephemeral, and just needed discussing at that time.
Back when the leaderboard was just counting questions asked, I was well on the way to being number one. I've even been known to ask other people to ask a question for me, just to keep from adding to the total. Same with comments. I'm glad they don't just COUNT them anymore; it was making me very self-conscious.
@sgoman5674: I had found the thread but didn't see the back and forth over the fact that seller called her a "dude" and a correction in no uncertain terms ensued.
Some where out there is a right proper smack down done with style & grace.
@lavikinga: Mustard. You need to think of mustard. All you had to do was click on my name, and look at the deals I'd posted.
He's still kind of an idiot, though.
@shrdlu: yes, thank you. I was beginning to doubt myself. I had been looking under his name first. You, dear, have much more stuff to wander thru and I'm lazy tonight.
Went back and read his begging for the harrassment to stop/help me post deals: http://deals.woot.com/questions/details/f5c1436e-d6b3-4458-a74b-c6f8d207937d/will-you-help-finding-a-good-deal-so-harrassment-will-stop#19
That was just sad and now I feel bad for not liking this guy from the get-go :(
@shrdlu: I have found most people to tango with you are idiots! Makes for good laughs.
@shrdlu: I hear that. I remember at one point, before I started to hibernate, it was you and me head to head with most questions asked and most commented and most votes. I am very happy that woot got rid of these stats as it no longer is a fight between any two or three wooters.
@sgoman5674: But you both were demi-gods while it was happening ;)
@sgoman5674: Oh, my dear. Most people here that do that were idiots before they ever met me. I just sweetly point it out. ;-}
@lavikinga: What do you mean, "were" ???
Okay, there's a disturbance in the force... BRB.
[Edit] I crack myself up sometimes. The force is now at peace again.
@shrdlu: Disturbance = empty cup and Force = coffee?
@sgoman5674: Disturbance equals entertainment elsewhere; force equals (in this, and only this case) the general health of bits of the interwebs here and there.
So it goes.
We're going to try something a little different in the "top early adopters" slot. More details coming soon...
If you could replace this slot with ANY leaderboard statistic, what would it be?
@shawnmiller: Oh, I hope I have some time to come back with an answer (or two) for this. No surprise, I'm sure, but I have a suggestion or two. Heck, I'll even send along the math stuffs for a couple of them. Math is good. We like math.
@shawnmiller: http://deals.woot.com/questions/details/e5fba7fe-9ba9-4d22-ab56-a3fb97a8866a/what-fields-should-be-included-in-the-new-leaderboard-page#23 is a thread about ideas for the leaderboard right after it was announced that it would go through revamping a month ago.
Not all of the ideas are good, but some of them are.
What about a rotating rank? Perhaps everyday it changes to a different category based on the results of the previous week.
Stats
- Asked
- 2 years ago
- Asked By
- sgoman5674
- Answered
- 61 times
- Viewed
- 1785 times
- Voted Against
- 0 times
- Voted For
- 13 times
61 Answers answer
Sort By: