John Kowalski
Banned
Don't judge me
Hey OP, what is your h index?
Oh, I'm good at that.
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.What about when people quote bad posts? Doesn't that mess with the model?
did you sample gaming thread or off topic threads?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).
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.
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.
(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.)
Other posters would probably want to engage with a good poster
No they don't.I probably get a fair few quotes because I have bad opinions and people like to tell me how wrong I am.
Thank you!This is very useful
I remember you talking about this study in another thread. You said you considered publishing it in a journal. Did you manage?
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.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.
​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.
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.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
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.
My h index for neogaf threads is 43
What is yours?
I should make a thread about that one of these days
How do you objectively track your quality as a neogaf poster?
I worry about it enough IRL
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.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).
Also, I thought the search function only shows a thread once? So the number of results you get isn't the number times you've been quoted, but the number of threads in which you've been quoted.
My h index for neogaf threads is 43
What is yours?
I should make a thread about that one of these days
I'm a shit poster and near invisible. Probably quoted under 100.
The most quoted people are people who are about to get banned, usually.
My h index for neogaf threads is 43
What is yours?
I should make a thread about that one of these days
What about when people quote bad posts? Doesn't that mess with the model?
Go to bed, op.
Quote this to send op to bed
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.
Go to bed, op.
Quote this to send op to bed