Could fluther use a Jelly Value rating?

sounds like a popularity contest to me. If Fluther isn’t a contest, and lurve has no inherent value beyond the quality of your answers, left totally up to those in the collective to give or not give as they see fit, this seems, I don’t know, somehow disingenuous. Maybe I’m looking at it wrong, (and that is a very distinct possibility) but it seems a way to add drama to Fluther, not to diminish it. I say if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

If you want to see someone’s question-to-answer ratio, all you have to do is visit their Fluther external profile. The lurve they have speaks for itself. That’s just my two cents, though, maybe someone else will have a better answer to your question.

So are you saying that indicates that 79% of your questions/comments get lurved? If so, that would be kinda cool.

I see your point, and think that I would have a high rating using this system. I have been here over 2 years, but I don’t often have time to spend with the more social aspects if Fluther. I pick and choose rather carefully, and usually offer responses when I think I can actually add something to the discussion. As such, my Lurve isn’t high.

But still, the system would be skewed by the Lurve that is given to humorous quips and popular members, and wouldn’t necessarily reflect quality over quantity, as you seem to intend.

EDIT: I just looked at the formula… I see that you are factoring questions and Answers… so my score mght be low since I ask few Questions. Therefore, it may not be a good measure of a Jelly’s “value” after all. :-/

@hearkat: ”...skewed by the Lurve given to humorous quips…”

Is there something wrong with funny answers?

Not ‘wrong’ per se… but if the purpose of Fluther is to answer questions, those quips while often good for a chuckle usually are not providing direct answers.

I’m on my iPhone in a rental car office and have to get to work…

There’s already a similar tool out there that maybe @richardhenry)(? put together. Maybe someone else can dig it up. It’s on a different Web site, but it pulls that data and lets you view it a couple of different ways.

@hearkat Lurve is given when someone provides a “Great Answer”, sometimes I will read a comment that answers the question thoroughly and think “Hey, great answer, that was very helpful” but other times I will see a funny response and think “Haha! great answer, that is hilarious!” Both should be rewarded.

That kind of calculation breaks down at high lurve levels because of the “max out” phenomenon. The more lurve points a user has, the less GAs will contribute to their total score because so many other users have maxed out on the lurve they can give to that user. So the total score becomes much less indicative of the number of actual GAs they’ve received. The ratio of lurve to responses may more accurate for people with lower lurve totals but it’s almost meaningless at the higher levels.

Been done.

@kevbo The one from PaulC?
That was the site. It looks like he took it down.

At any rate, I have said it before, LURVE SMURVE.

@peedub 404 Not Found

I agree, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Is Fluther about ego or answers?

Well, anyone who is interested can figure it out using whatever measure they want. All the data are publicly available if you want to go and get it. I have no idea what your measure tells us. I think that @Harp‘s point that any meaningful number would have to be adjusted for time spent is a good one.

@ChazMaz this isn’t an ego thing, it’s more just to help other jellies get an inkling of how much certain jellies contribute. Anyone can get high amounts of lurve if they ask enough questions and post enough comments eventually, but a value system would tell a jelly the regularity in which that poster contributes to the collective.

@Harp that did cross my mind, but I’m in class currently and really not in the mood to go through and find a suitable equation or algorithm for it, just used the basic division pinciple to give people an idea. I’d leave the exact science to the programmers you know?

I dont see how it adds anything to the site.

“value system would tell a jelly the regularity in which that poster contributes to the collective.”

So it would be more of a fun thing to do? Knowing how much certain jellies contribute.

Damn. Forget about the lurve already.

What about using this energy to help an old lady across the street or spend a day volunteering for Habitat for Humanity. This issue saps too much valuable energy or as @tinyfaery said so eloquently, “Damn….”

Whatever happened to paulC?

@J0E: I give Lurve for witty remarks, too. I am by no means suggesting otherwise.

Apparently, the score as proposed in the Question is meant to reflect the regularity of a member’s “contributions”. Which I agree with most that have commented, does not add to the site… after all, one has to ‘contribute’ regularly to get high Lurve; and Lurve factors prominently in the formula, so it does show quantity and popularity over quality.

I suppose there is no real way to put a score on quality, though, since it involves a value judgement.

Well, I mean, it’s cool to see things like that, but I’ve seen rankings on other sites really ruin things. It’s probably not a good idea to have it displayed publicly. Maybe something you could just see if you clicked on a few things.

We don’t need rankings, ratios, quotients, algorithms, or competitions. We don’t need to compare ourselves with one another or single anyone out any more than we do at 10k and 20k and so on. That’s enough.

162.13

@Ivan But what does that mean?

@J0E

In the equation, Lurve just cancels, so it ends up just being the number of responses divided by the number of questions asked. So I guess it’s a measure of how often you post responses in relation to how often you ask questions.

i hereby declare my Lurve Value Rating to be:

42

very original

I know. I’m just hoping we can have another question about lurve/what is lurve worth/how can i recalculate my lurve/what is lurve like/lurve lurve lurvy lurve.

lurve.

those are very original.

Ok, I would have a 160.25.
No, wait, now I have written a new response. Thats gonna change it.
Oh, man…Why did I get into that long argument with BlondsJon? That must have been 40 responses with no lurve!

paulC’s awesome app stopped working a while ago when they changed something internally with the lurve. It was kinda cool to be able to look at all those stats. Even though they mean nothing, im just a stat whore :P

Speaking of Lurve, does anyone know who has the most?

That would be Astro(nomical)chuck, at 20823 and counting.

Marina currently has 20953.

Oops, good call.