TheGrobe, I agree with your example. It's possibly the place on Chess.com where ratings are best implemented now. Yes, you could run a risk of abuse, but I don't see alot of abuse in the Downloads section either. The main reason the abuse with the trophies "worked" was because most serious people didn't vote, and only the abusing people voted.
Site Trophies and Top Blogging
Sort:
Loomis wrote:
Phobetor wrote:
Loomis wrote:
Obviously, from what I've already written in this thread, I support user feedback for rating blogs. I just don't think there is a necessity to cut out the management entirely. The executive discretion of the site owners is still valuable.
You have some good points there, but still... erik and the Chess.com staff don't pay bloggers to share their content, while Chess.com members do pay for memberships, which also includes being able to view good content. I do think that at least the paying members of Chess.com should have a say in it as well. Or erik should start paying good bloggers :)
Re-read what you quoted of me. I don't disagree that giving the members a tool have a say in it as well is a good idea.
Yes, sorry, you're right. I was replying to your first two alineas mostly, and missed that in the third alinea you said you actually support user feedback.
Jan 24, 2009
0
#44
"That's why I add smileys, it's easier to see I'm joking then :)"
But I like the uncertainty.
"What do you all actually think about the whole Articles & Blogs (& News) section differences?"
I think it's a chess.com issue. You mentioned, facetiously I presume, that chess.com should pay exceptional bloggers. I would say, instead, that blogging is a personal activity, and, if that personal activity coincides with chess.com's purposes (hence, the Top Bloggers) then it's a win-win® situation. On the other hand, an article would be non-personal contribution, strictly for chess.com's benefit. Perhaps that's where the facetiously mentioned payment should come in. I would call 95% of what I write articles, but they'll only ever be posted in my blog. I like to keep things personal.
Dozy wrote:
ADK: I was wondering the same thing a while back. I think the system recognizes Top Bloggers based on the select few who were already ones... This means that no one else can have his/her's on display! No matter how hard I tried to make MY blog good enough, it was not cut out to be one.
Yep, there's a way in, ADK. You only have to hammer on the door loudly enough and you'll get in.
I had the same problem a few months ago. I realised that I wasn't going to get many readers without a front-page listing so I wrote multiple posts (go to my blog and check the frequency from June 1 last year). I usually got between 40 and 80 views for each post but when they took me past the totals shown in the top bloggers page I put up a forum post and asked how to break in. (Much like you've done with this post.)
Erik reviewed the top bloggers' list and I think a few of us were added at the same time. Give it a try.
BTW, if you look at my total number of viewers now you won't find any showing only 40-80 readers, but that's been caused by a spill-over from viewers reading the more recent posts, then going back to read what they missed before.
I'll wait until Summer Break before asking... : )
ADK
Jan 26, 2009
0
#46
ok. so i just read all of this. and i'm encouraged and discouraged at the same time :P
we know that content needs an overhaul. and for some people it is the top priority. but it isn't at the top of our list right now so i can't make the full overhaul happen like i want. it is hard because there is just so much going on with chess.com :( but i want to make sure all of our bloggers are happy. anyway, i understand the need, but am not entirely sure of the best solution yet. we do include stars on articles, etc, but if you go look, almost nobody votes on them. we need to rethink how we do voting (more like digg or something). anyway, it's an ENORMOUS project. we obviously didn't nail the right formula the first time around and are aware that we need to address it. in the meantime, people are writing good stuff, and lots of people are reading that good stuff.
point is, i know it's broken, but it isn't broken to the point of uselessness i hope, but more to the point of annoyance. like a bike where sometimes the brakes don't work? :D
Jan 26, 2009
0
#47
thanks for taking the time to come in, erik. we can only guess at how busy you are.
of course we'll all keep writing, but we might have to find some original ways to attract readers.
cheers
Feb 18, 2009
0
#48
It's interesting to note that almost three weeks into February the site trophies are not up to be voted on. Looks as if they may have been dropped, so that's one half of the problem fixed.
Dozy wrote:
of course we'll all keep writing, but we might have to find some original ways to attract readers.
When I posted that I was feeling all bright eyed and optimistic, but since then we've lost Batgirl's superb blog.
Since she's already stated the case more than once for improving the "Top Bloggers" display on the home page I really don't see her continuing to beat a dead horse. Pity! Still, if the problem could be resolved perhaps she would consider returning to the chess.com blogosphere.
Let's hope nobody else gets so frustrated that they stop writing.
Feb 18, 2009
0
#49
ughh. bummer. i've been kinda out and didn't even notice. makes me sick. we'll work on some solution ideas. sorry it's taken so long.
Sorry. They're up now.
Baseballfan wrote:
Sorry. They're up now.
If you're referring to the site trophies which are back, then maybe you should learn to read... (unless that "sorry" is an apology for putting the trophies back online)
I like batgirl's stuff.....................
Feb 22, 2009
0
#53
ok. the whole content issue needs a complete overhaul as i've stated before. however, i agree there is a quick stop-gap fix that we can do.
Just to make sure, are these the pages that need to be fixed? I want to make sure I have them all:
- http://www.chess.com/ (homepage) (rotate all 5 spots randomly with all top blogs posted in the last 48 hours (or minimum time needed to have 5 spots), with only 1 blog per blogger in the mix?)
- http://www.chess.com/read.html (rotate all 5 spots randomly with all top blogs posted in the last 48 hours (or minimum time needed to have 5 spots), with only 1 blog per blogger in the mix?)
- http://www.chess.com/blog/ (maybe rotate that top spot with the top blogs of the last 48 hours, using the most recent blog post if more than 1 from 1 person?)
i want bloggers to be happy. i'm sorry i have been slow to move on this - i have been very, very busy with other chess.com projects lately and i apologize. batgirl and dozy, will these changes above be enough for you to continue? :)
FYI - as a heads up, starting in march we will have daily columns done by professional chess writers. they will all be articles, however.
It would also help if there was no difference between the #1 and #2-5. The bigger letters and the first two lines of the blog post are totally unnecessary. If the first item had smaller letters, you could put 8-10 posts there. If you then also only put one post max per member there, then everyone will get enough attention.
But I understand if you want to keep the fancy big headlines, like with the news and articles. It's impractical, but it does look better.
Feb 22, 2009
0
#55
First, let me reiterate that I fully understand priorities and I that was never upset or anything. I was mostly disconcerted because I kept putting in a ridiculous amount of work for hardly any payback. It wasn't even a question of being happy, it was just a frustrating situation of a practical nature.
hmmm . . . I don't ever visit these two pages: chess.com or chess.com/read, but my assumption is that currently they must all update in tandem with the Top Blogging page which I do visit systematically.
My suggestion for that page would be to increase the number of "top bloggers" by having some sort of application process whereas a person can promise that his or her blog will be primarily chess-ic in nature. There could even be a check box on every "top bloggers" page that could be checked if that particular entry is of a chess nature. Now, with the increase in Top or Chess Bloggers, the page would only feature chess-related blogs, listed with the latest on top, with no entry given any special showcasing (and the blurb, consisting of the first line of the blog entry could be eliminated entirely so more entries could be listed on that page). Other, non-chess blogs, could be listed smaller on the right of the page (where it now says "most recent blogs"). I would like to see more blogs on chess and have those blogs given exposure (but not at my expense) and I think this can be accomplished -while I'm definitely not a programmer - relatively easily.
Feb 22, 2009
0
#56
Hi Erik,
First, thank you for the speedy response. I understand how busy you must be.
The key issue is that no blogger should have more than one post in the mix. It's actually self-destructive anyway. If you look at the large collection of posts Blunderprone put up yesterday you can see that while his later posts got a good response, he pushed his earlier posts (and everybody else's) off the front page and was getting only a few hits for the earlier ones.
Phobetor's point is a very good one: it would help if there was no difference in the font size between #1 and #5.
Also, I agree with batgirl who suggested doing away with the introductory blurb on the #1 post to make it possible for more two or three additional blogs to be highlighted.
Only showing posts from the past 48 hours might be a bit restrictive. I'd prefer a week but, if not, then 72 hours. I've made a practise of limiting my posts to approximately one a week for two reasons: one is to give the other bloggers a fair go, the other is because I think that posting too many items tends to create a ho-hum situation for regular readers.
http://www.chess.com/blog/ has just been updated in the last Chess.com update. It now shows three featured bloggers and (as far as I can see) only one post per blogger. Also, on the frontpage, the featured blogs vary every time you refresh the frontpage, with only one post per blogger on it maximum.
So batgirl, you can start posting again! ;)
Even with the risk of reviving an old thread, this seems to be a good place to write this.
First, the new top-blog system is better than the old one. Thank you chess.com for listening and taking action
Second, did the monthly awards go away? Currently I don't see anything at the vote for site awards page (http://www.chess.com/vote_trophy_list.html). These seemed to be rarely voted for anyhow (less than 100 votes for the winner). I had the idea to put a message on my blog encouraging people to vote for the site trophies (not just for my blog, but if they liked someone else's blog/article, whatever, they should vote). With thousands of reads for the top blogs, if everyone encouraged their readers to vote, the site awards might reclaim some meaning -- that is, if they still exist.
Third, I have some comments about "Last 60 days". I think it's good to have the number of reads be relevant to recent blogging so that the top bloggers are more likely actively blogging. It would also be nice to have a link to a list of "most reads all time". Also, reads in the last 60 days appears to be calculated as reads for posts published in the last 60 days. This is different for reads in the last 60 days. I wonder why it isn't calculated the 2nd way (I realize this is slightly more trouble to code).
Are they hand counting the ballots?
Apr 6, 2009
0
#60
"did the monthly awards go away?"
If not, they should.
I just looked for the first time in a long time and noticed that for March 2009 the member who was awarded the trophies for Top Article, Best Author and Most Active Contributor has never contributed a single article and, since he joined a year ago, has written a total of one generic blog entry and has had 14 forum postings.
Draw your own conclusions.
I think that there's a lot of potential for the ratings that chess.com has implemented here: http://www.chess.com/downloads to be used in a number of other places throughout the site. Blogs would be a great place to start, but you run the risk of opening the door for the same type of abuse that was highlighted for the site awards to the blogs if you do....