How is there nothing here
-
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?
- Thread starter hydrophilic attack
- Start date
- Status
Oh thanks didn't know you could do that.
hydrophilic attack
Member
Oh thanks didn't know you could do that.
Well, you'd better give me co-credit for your paper if you use this method now (joking of course)
Wow, you're a much better poster than me D:
Fallout-NL
Member
True that.
hydrophilic attack
Member
I dunno if it's that easy. Maybe you will get it, personally, but many people will probably be confused by this post
well, that goes without saying
no one has ever said this about me
and actually I miscalculated, my post search only brings me back to 11-24-2016
1345:2595 posts = 0.5183
uncelestial
Member
I've been quoted 1495 times and posted 3,701 times. So, just shy of 50% Q/P ratio.
Almost all the times times I can recall being quoted heavily was when I had an opinion unpopular to a vocal group within in a thread -- disliking Skyler from Breaking Bad, disagreeing that "artpop" is really all that artistic, preferring Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton, and blaming landlords and hyper-inflationary capitalism for sky-high SF rent instead of tech workers.
I did get quoted a lot by people who agreed when I said that the period from 88-96 (Straight Outta Compton thru the deaths of Biggie and Tupac) was my favorite era of rap. But I think it's people's tendency to speak up when they disagree more than when they agree. A lot of reasonable posts just go by and people are like "yep" without saying too much. That's how I read, too.
The only real way to judge post quality is actual quality metrics. We could be doing thumbs up/thumbs down ratings for posts. But, then we'd be reddit. Gamifying NeoGAF seems like a natural enough impulse but I'm glad we don't.
Almost all the times times I can recall being quoted heavily was when I had an opinion unpopular to a vocal group within in a thread -- disliking Skyler from Breaking Bad, disagreeing that "artpop" is really all that artistic, preferring Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton, and blaming landlords and hyper-inflationary capitalism for sky-high SF rent instead of tech workers.
I did get quoted a lot by people who agreed when I said that the period from 88-96 (Straight Outta Compton thru the deaths of Biggie and Tupac) was my favorite era of rap. But I think it's people's tendency to speak up when they disagree more than when they agree. A lot of reasonable posts just go by and people are like "yep" without saying too much. That's how I read, too.
The only real way to judge post quality is actual quality metrics. We could be doing thumbs up/thumbs down ratings for posts. But, then we'd be reddit. Gamifying NeoGAF seems like a natural enough impulse but I'm glad we don't.
hydrophilic attack
Member
Welp, then you are much worse than me
well, that goes without saying
Like the hat?
Banned
doesn't work for me. just finds posts with quotes that contain the words like, the, and hat.
KO Traveling Hobo
Member
Quotes are worthless. The only thing that ever mattered were delicious, animated, green :lol emotes, and they're gone. All that's left is an endless mimicry devoid of purpose.
This is a world without God.
This is a world without God.
hydrophilic attack
Member
but that is much harder to calculate
Jeronimo Jones
Member
I don't get quoted a lot, mostly because posters often agree with my flawless logic and don't feel the need to add anything to my posts.
Quotes don't tell you anything about the quality of a post.
That's a really stupid method.
I'd be willing to bet that "posts that get more than 3 quotes" is the strongest predictor we can get for "posts that get an user banned", and that "posts that do not get quoted" has strong negative correlation with "posts that can get an user banned"
And "Quality" is nebolous, but we can surely say it correlates negatively with posts that cause bans.
I'd be willing to bet that "posts that get more than 3 quotes" is the strongest predictor we can get for "posts that get an user banned", and that "posts that do not get quoted" has strong negative correlation with "posts that can get an user banned"
And "Quality" is nebolous, but we can surely say it correlates negatively with posts that cause bans.
hydrophilic attack
Member
I've taken a lot of bans (8 to be exact) and none of the posts that caused them have been close to my most quoted posts
According to this method, my Q/P ratio is somewhere around 70% (not precise because not all search results were actual quotes, some were mentions and others were unrelated). But most of the quotes were in threads about Islam where most people very strongly disagreed with me and I was often very outnumbered, hence the many quotes. So I don't think it says anything about objective quality.
On the other hand, thanks to you I read some of those posts about Islam/Muslims again and damn... I should compile that shit into a book 'cause those posts are fucking gorgeous. Seriously tho, I actually felt proud reading them. Thanks OP, you made me fall back in love with myself.
On the other hand, thanks to you I read some of those posts about Islam/Muslims again and damn... I should compile that shit into a book 'cause those posts are fucking gorgeous. Seriously tho, I actually felt proud reading them. Thanks OP, you made me fall back in love with myself.
lastplayed
Member
Fewer quotes means fewer people disagree with you.
hydrophilic attack
Member
Really OP? That's your basis for a quality post? By being quoted?
I know a bit about statistics and I am confident that the data is misrepresented between actual quality posts and shitposts.
There's several factors involved here: Posters with multiple accounts trying to skew an argument in one direction, shitpost quote trains, and most OT communities quote invite/room infos.
I'm sure I have a terrible quote % myself, I mainly use neogaf to meet up gaming communities and don't post too much in gaming/off topic.
I know a bit about statistics and I am confident that the data is misrepresented between actual quality posts and shitposts.
There's several factors involved here: Posters with multiple accounts trying to skew an argument in one direction, shitpost quote trains, and most OT communities quote invite/room infos.
I'm sure I have a terrible quote % myself, I mainly use neogaf to meet up gaming communities and don't post too much in gaming/off topic.
Now this is a quality post, because OP said so and not because it is actually true.
/s
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
don't take it so seriously
everyone knows that tag-bragging is how you actually show off on GAF
hydrophilic attack
Member
Yeah, peeps should probably assume I'm not serious 95% of the time on gaf
Pretty much somewhat serious only in threads about politics or Souls
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I found my quality as a poster increased enormously when I stopped posting.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Most I get quoted is when I either post something dumb or piss someone off.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
i found method 4
I think it's safe to say OP has an analytics addiction.
Also, all this did was make me hungry - restful sleep my ass!
The only thing objective is that this can determine whether your posts generate replies. What is not objective about this is whether that determines your quality as a poster. In fact, the posts that are probably quoted the least from my personal observation are those that provide a thorough, well researched contrary opinion without blatant shocking or inflammatory remarks.
hydrophilic attack
Member
What's the point of researching an opinion if you ain't gonna put some shocking and inflammatory stuff in there to make people engage with it
itwasTuesday
He wasn't alone.
24% or, 6/25
NumberThree
Member
First off, how the hell do I have over 6000 posts here. I never post.
But from the last year I have 1318 posts and 468 quotes. Sounds about right, I try not to contribute in discussions too much.
But from the last year I have 1318 posts and 468 quotes. Sounds about right, I try not to contribute in discussions too much.
ChubbyHuggs
Member
Damn, that's a lot more than I thought. Not quality though lolI just did a quick check and you have been quoted more times than the search result maximum, more than 1500 times
So it's not all that bad
ReadingRambo
Member
You are much more likely to be quoted if you are wrong.
John Kowalski
Banned
It's true, I've had three tags which means I'm the best
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked