• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

What is your Q/P ratio? Is it improving or regressing?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mohasus

Member
" Other posters would probably want to engage with a good poster, so a good poster would be likely to be quoted a lot."

This is wrong. Most of the time I am shitposting, so my most quoted posts are the worst ones. It is incredible how easy GAF likes to take the bait. Sometimes I wonder how I've never been banned yet.
 

Dali

Member
What about when people quote bad posts? Doesn't that mess with the model? :D
Lol first thing that came to mind was whoever posted someone apparently getting mauled or killed (i didn't click the YouTube link) without a description or a nsfw tag in the thread where the little girl was pulled into the water by a sea lion. Like half the posts in that thread are quoting him.
 
Last year I did a study on what affected your chances of being quoted. It wasn't super robust (It was a for a professor who focuses on qualitative methods so he was easily impressed with what I managed to do) but maybe my data and conclusions would be interesting in this context.

I collected data on the number of times users were quoted and the number of times users quoted throughout a sample of 25 threads. Here's a history gram of the number of times users who posted in threads quoted others (outDegree).

71nMcY5.png


So there is actually very little quoting going on compared to posting. I don't have the corresponding graph on this computer though but if anyone is interested to see it, I can dig it up.

I split the study in two: post content and user characteristics. For post content, I compared the emotional content including joy, anger, sadness, trust, surprise, anticipation, etc. The type of thread really seemed to have an effect on how much emotional content differed between quoted and non-quoted posts. In general, the angrier and more disgusted posts were quoted more often. :p

For user characteristics, I compared user title/tag, years of membership, posts per day, avatar, and position in the a sample of the NeoGAF social network. The regression I ran only explained about 25% of the variation in number of posts quoted. Posts per day and years of membership were the only significant predictors.

I didn't account for the interaction between post content and user characteristics, which would be the next step. Maybe one day I'll go back to it.

So according to my study, if you want to be quoted: stay longer, post more, and be angrier. :p

(I never checked to see if I was in any of the threads I used for the study so I don't know how I fared.)
did you sample gaming thread or off topic threads?

a lot of gaming threads have nearly zero quotes. people just read the thread title and rush to post their thoughts without reading anyone elses... if the thread is asking a question, you'll see 20 people answer it exactly the same way, sometimes adjacent to each other. off topic is a bit better.
 

Pau

Member
This is very useful :D

I remember you talking about this study in another thread. You said you considered publishing it in a journal. Did you manage?
Thank you!

And I haven't even started the process. :(

did you sample gaming thread or off topic threads?

a lot of gaming threads have nearly zero quotes. people just read the thread title and rush to post their thoughts without reading anyone elses... if the thread is asking a question, you'll see 20 people answer it exactly the same way, sometimes adjacent to each other. off topic is a bit better.
Half gaming, half off-topic. I agree though, the quoting practices are probably different between the two! Something else to consider if I return to it.
 

BGBW

Maturity, bitches.
BGBW said:
Interesting. So if I post everything in quote tags from the get go that means all my posts from now on shall be automatically judged as brilliant and I'll be seen as the best and most perfect poster on this board.
​
 
If you don't want the free market to determine poster quality, what is your proposed alternative?

Poster scores determined by mods? Welfare quotes to help lower quality posters? Why would anyone make an effort on gaf in such a socialist dystopia
I say we give all the points to the people who already have the highest points. That way the points will trickle down and create good posters throughout the forum.
 
Lol first thing that came to mind was whoever posted someone apparently getting mauled or killed (i didn't click the YouTube link) without a description or a nsfw tag in the thread where the little girl was pulled into the water by a sea lion. Like half the posts in that thread are quoting him.

Lol, now you made me curious so I checked it out

You can totally click that link! It's adorable!
 

eso76

Member
How do you objectively track your quality as a neogaf poster?

Wrong method.
Posts people disagree with are quoted a lot more than rational and sensible ones people see nothing wrong with.
I could drop a "botw is so overrated" or "rap isn't even worthy of being considered music" and my Q/P ratio would improve dramatically.
That says nothing about my quality as poster.
 

Devil

Member
With OPs theory I must be NeoGAF scum.

Some of my posts are the last of a few threads. I regularly feel invisible on here when my posts get ignored. My only ever thread has 0 replies (it was about questions which were ignored before in another thread).
 

Ryaaan14

Banned
Blame space replies to ppl without quoting them

That's a telltale sign of a real son of a bitch IMO probably a total sociopath
 

Arttemis

Member
With OPs theory I must be NeoGAF scum.

Some of my posts are the last of a few threads. I regularly feel invisible on here when my posts get ignored. My only ever thread has 0 replies (it was about questions which were ignored before in another thread).
It's just a theory, and I believe it to be heavily flawed. You're not scum. The frequency of being quoted has little bearing on post quality, as many inflammatory remarks are quoted far more frequently than insightful ones.
 

Pau

Member
Also, I thought the search function only shows a thread once? So the number of results you get isn't the number of posts that have been quoted, but the number of threads in which you've been quoted.
 

besada

Banned
I'm not sure how often you're quoted is a good method for figuring out post quality. The most quoted people are people who are about to get banned, usually. I'm sure we've got junior accounts with less posts than quotes, but I wouldn't consider them good posters.

I couldn't be bothered to figure out my own, as I've been here a long time and have a lot of quotes.
 

Rktk

Member
For anyone concerned about the strength of their Q/P I recommend one of these 30 minutes before posting activity.

LQvoBhb.png
 

Miletius

Member
Just based on logic and reasoning, I'd be surprised if anybody had a quote/post ratio that was even close to 1. The vast majority of posts go unquoted. The ones that do end up being quoted, usually end up being quoted once or twice at most, unless, on rare occasions, people find a reason to gang up on the poster.

Considering that, 65 percent sounds like a very high ratio. i'd imagine that it makes you fairly prolific -- although we don't want to be conflating a good poster with one who is quoted consistently. They are different things, and while one can be an indicator of the other, they aren't necessarily the same thing by a long shot.
 

_Nemo

Member
Y'all need a life if you care about being quoted. Aim higher in life.

Shit posts are what get quoted 90% of the time so it's not an accurate measurement.
 

turmoil

Banned
My username being a common word destroys the system, sadly. The search returns a lot of post in threads I have never posted.

I would say that roughly one of five of my post is quoted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom