You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Towards a reputation system suitable for SteemSTEM
I have considered different half-life values before picking the above ones for the exact problematics you were mentioning. However, I have never thought about a maximum loss of value. I will implement this "maximum decay" after work, and see what we get. According to the results, we could decide whether this is a good idea or not (I think it is).
Maximum decay seems like a good idea to me, so long as the value is relatively small, maybe even less then 1/16th of its original value. This criterion is likely more important for bloggers then for commenting. As we want to encourage active engagement rather then past engagement.
I agree. It shouldn’t be so large that it discourages new users from contributing and it may not work out in the end. Either way, I’m super psyched you all liked my idea :)
I have tried 1/8 and 1/16. 1/16 has an effect on what is going on beyond rank #75, the first modification being the position #78. 1/8 start affect anything beyond #10. However, the modifications sound really wrong compared to my gut feelings. Like users not active for more than a year are there... I am thus keeping the 1/16 for the next version.
You are #56 for the authorship metric and #80 for the comments, in case you are interested. This gives a final position of #50 (#51 with the original code).
That was fast work. Interesting to see where both methods start having an effect. Thanks for the ranking info too :)
I like to try things, and in any cases, many brains are always superior to a single brain (which I why I always share my ideas).