Friday, February 20, 2009
Be a 'star'

We've gotten a lot of complaints recently about the rating system here at iReport.com and the so-called "One-star Bandits," who give low marks to iReporters they don't like.

 

The rating system is a great tool for iReporters to help surface the stories they think are important, but it's also being abused. We found that some people have created multiple accounts so that they could give stories more than one rating.

 

We've identified some of the biggest offenders and have removed them from the site and are continuing to work on the problem. One of the steps we're taking is to make sure that users only have one account, but this is a time consuming process.

 

You can help by deactivating any extra accounts you may have.

 

If you have any other questions, issues or concerns, we'd love to talk to you about it.

 

Join us here on the blog on Monday between 11a.m. and 1 p.m. ET and we'll answer as many questions as we can.

84 Comments
February 20, 2009
Click to view zennie62's profile

Fortunately, I have just one account -- zennie62!  Well, one here I mean! LOL

February 21, 2009
Click to view KCRep's profile

It's nice to see someone on iReport is actually taking action against people that don't really belong on here.  Thanks davidw.

February 21, 2009
Click to view yorksnbeans's profile

Glad to see you are paying attention to users problems.  The one star issue is a concern as is abusive comments from those multi-id users.  Luckily, so far, I have not been a recipient of those abusive attacks and hope I won't become one (the one star bandit though attacks me on every report normally within minutes of posting), but for those who do, there should be some quick recourse. I know it must be a hard job to keep on top of all users, but maybe implimenting some type of requirement to keep your account active, such as requiring periodic reports, such as maybe one per month.  If they don't post a report, they're gone.  I don't know, just an idea.

February 21, 2009
Click to view chzman's profile

KCRep

 

It is funny how you thank davidw.  He has attacked me personally on my iReports because he disagrees with my views.  He can dish it out but has no idea how to ignore the childlike behavior he uses himself.  I could care less what people say or how they rate my report, this is to be an unfiltered way of expressing our opinions and stories, without the fear of being penalized for disagreements.  However I do not agree with the abusive language that I see so much of here but it is still an unfiltered media.  Deal with it.  No one should have more than one account, just remember that some people have family members that have accounts to, like my wife and we use the same ip addresses, so do not delete her account in this process.

February 21, 2009
Click to view yorksnbeans's profile

chzman - I think you are mistaking the author of this post "davidw", an iReport employee, with another user.

February 21, 2009
Click to view chzman's profile

Oh my mistake the user I was referring to is davidjw and he recently made this report, crying about iReporter Harassment and how it should be investigated.

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-216566

So you see the names they are VERY similar and his recent cry baby post, I felt there was a connection.  He was the one that called davidw,"David Williams" he refers to him in the report.

February 22, 2009
Click to view rosehips's profile

chz, easy mistake. I originally thought they were the same as well.

 

I'll try to make it here tomorrow to chime in. I'm very sorry to see so much drama around people being booted. There are a lot of demented people who troll around here. I doubt we can ever rid ourselves of them and I'd hate to see us lose good folk in the effort.

February 22, 2009

Hi everyone. I think it's important to please give everyone a second chance in this world. I know it's easy to judge someone by one comment they make but as I have said in the past-it's kind of like driving on the highway and someone cuts you off. You have two choices-let the person go or honk your horn and call them son of a bisquit. I prefer to let the person go because everyone is struggling right now and it's always best in this world to give people the benefit of the doubt and not be so quick to assume the worst about people. peace to all. I think the 1 star bandit could be a kid or someone from jail. No one knows for sure. lol

February 22, 2009

I am surprised Jay Leno hasn't mentioned the 1 star bandit. It's actually kind of funny. He should interview people in Hollywood if they know who he is or us Ireporters should do that! LOL

February 22, 2009
Click to view nycscripts's profile

When I first came on iReport when living in Vienna, Austria this summer, it was a pleasure to be a part of the iReport team.  I was fortunate to be in Vienna during the Euro 2008 Soccer World Games and the International Broadcasters on CNN were more than pleasant and FUN to deal with.  So for the most part it's been a great hobby, until the arrival of the 1 STAR BANDIT who literally made all my work and efforts fade into a blank page the moment I posted. I've deactivated trying to shake him/her off my tail only to return and find him/her waiting for me.  It's been very disheartening as we all put time and effort into our reports only to have them literally fade away.  With modern technology I can't help to think that there is someway to identify this person and block them from the site.  I personally don't expect everyone to like my postings, but this is just an outright attack.

I finally had to resort to making a new account and I'm glad to say it hasn't been attacked.  I came away with one destarring, but hoping that was just someones choice, which is perfectly fine.

 

Like most of us on iReport, I'm not here for ratings, but would just like a fair chance to be read.  But unfortunately when the 1 STAR BANDIT hits you, you have no opportunities at all, when he attacks it's actually over.  All of your efforts of traveling and taking photos were to no avail.

 

I truly hope that the staff will come up with some quick solution so we can continue and that this will bring back some of the iReporters that have left and had added so much to the site.  They are truly missed.

February 22, 2009

I may not be able to join the Monday blog because I will be at work, so I will pose this question, which I have posed numerous times and has been repeatedly ignored by the iReport staff:

 

What I will never understand is, how does the iReport staff determine what gets "ON CNN" and what does not.

Recently an iReport appeared with the headline, "US Airways plain making an incredible trip through jersey city NJ", and included a video of the infamous US Air jet that landed in the Hudson being towed through Jersey City, NJ. The accompanying narrative was packed with spelling and grammatical errors, yet this item made it "ON CNN" unedited.

 

I am not questioning the newsworthiness of the story. Anyone who has tried to drive a car through Jersey City can attest to the fact that hauling a jet through the streets of JC is a big deal. And I am not talking about Pulitzer Prize standards, just basic English - the correct spelling of "plane", using upper case for the first letter of the name of a city, for example.

 

The iReport site states that posts that are "ON CNN" are "vetted". The vetting process should, in addition to verifying that the media is the property of the poster, return the posting to the iReporter for correction of spelling and grammatical errors. Although iReport is meant to be for amateur journalists, if an iReport is deemed worthy of being "ON CNN", it should be held to at least some minimal journalistic standards, i.e., proper grammar and spelling.

 

So, again, what criteria are used by the iReport staff to determine what gets "ON CNN" and what does not? I have posed this question repeatedly to the iReport staff and cannot seem to get any kind of answer.

February 22, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

I dont know if I can make the time as I am not sure what it is in gmt. Can anone translate it?

February 22, 2009

I won't be here tomorrow either, so here are my 2 cents

 

1) The problem with the one star bandit seems to be getting better lately.

 

2) A thumbs up/thumbs down or a one star system, or just using the positive stars to rate the post could help solve the problem. or

 

3) Average up the ratings, so if a post has a 4.5 rating average up to a 5. or

 

4) Keep the current system, but use only the 5 star ratings to position a post, so a post with 10 x 5 stars and 1 x one star would be higher than a post with 9 x 5 stars and no one stars.

 

Thank you so much for taking our concerns so seriously.  Even with all that is going on, ireports is really so much fun to post and comment on!

 

Jeff, I know that particular post bugs you, but that plain post got thousands of hits.  The footage was amazing and that is why it got on CNN.  I am guessing the staff chooses posts that they think will be a 'hit' or that are great live footage of current events.

 

 

(oooh I like the preview button can we get that for the comments in ireport?)

February 22, 2009
Click to view chrispy02160's profile

I am glad you are taking the time to listen to the members of this site. I would say that people are at times, nasty. I think that much like OCgirl says it, they are already in a bad mood and happen upon your thread. Or they are just irked by your mere existence. There is no real way to regulate peoples behaviour, and I don't think there is any real need to try.

 

If we were all medicated enough to get along all of the time, then there would really be nothing interesting to say or hear would there? No means of growth, or personal expansion. If we equate ourselves with the rating of others, then we have some deeper issues possibly. I think that there might be a way for this to be remedied.

 

If a post is allowed to remain on "most recent" for some period of time, say 4 hrs. I realize that sheer traffic will make this difficult, but look, most of the people reading the articles, are the same ones writing them. I don't believe some of these posts to be "newsworthy" or even factual. Look at some of mine for examples.

 

I believe that this site is in essence, a place to come and look into other peoples world through their lens, and in that capacity it is fantastic. I have read "stories" that are one sentence, how is that a story?

 

A good portion of the stories in here are merely personal opinion, an editorial relating to some topic the author is interested in.

 

Are there reasons to complain about incendiary, insulting comments? No. I would say that the forum we ALL subscribe to and any abuse we recieve is self-inflicted. We choose to do this, that includes all that comes with it, good and bad.

 

I would suggest that the rating system change in a positive way- in addition only. You don't have to rate a story, you choose to add to the story or not. Better than giving the malicious the ability to detract from something that might actually be noteworthy. And that by itself is opinion isn't it?

 

Some authors I enjoy, and some I enjoy arguing with. Opinion.  Right or wrong, our little community has alot of venom in it. I like coming here, but have found its appeal waning as of late. I don't like reading stories that are simple regurgitation of AP wire feed. I just can't encourage someone to cut and paste others words. That is not original.

 

Alright I will discontinue this diatribe, end result:

 

1. Make the stars add only.

2. Users that don't post don't star.

3. Get some type of personal comment deletion tool, if you don't want to hear from another user. Self selection of input.If I don't want to see an attacker, let me choose.

 

Thanks CNN, DavidW and all that run this site. It has been a good experience for me.

February 22, 2009

Why do we need both a star rating and comments?

 

If you disagree with the post then make a comment saying so and explaining why.

February 22, 2009
Click to view KarmaHD's profile

I am new to IReport but learning my way, so if some of my observations are covered in the TOS it is due to my ignorance in not reading the terms of service completely. 

 

Ratings, if you look at the ratio of stories rated to the number of views the variance is numerically large.  This being the case that matrix appears to be of no value.  If you look as to the number of views verses comments this appears to be a more accurate value as to rating the pertinence of the topic.  As you are now finding, jealousy, insecurity, and anger are being vented through the use of the 1 star rating, so the elimination of the system, you might realize the byproduct of silencing the petty.

 

Since I am new I am also of the opinion that what "makes" it on CNN appears to be based on more the Jerry Springer approach to journalism than not.  I initially thought that the IReporters that appear consistently on CNN worked for the company, the same reporters appear day after day, varying little in content or thought, and apparently reviling in the attention to the point of being divisive.  Now if this is truly the most valuable players on this site that they consistently are chosen to vent their opinion that might be indicative of a poor understanding of the criteria of what is required to have an individual story or video posted on CNN.

 

A possible addition of "editorial/opinion" verses "news" might help separate the wheat from the chaff, and calm the emotionally agitated who find it necessary to vent party lines of thought rather than put forth constructive (subjective) comments.

 

IReport management have a difficult task here, how to let the people voice their opinion while maintaining some control over the debate, not an easy issue.  A couple of suggestions, one, rather than the pages of "legal conditions" post a mission statement for all posters to hopefully follow.  A concise brief mantra as to the behavior of the debaters, and the content of the topic.  Second, have a header "suggestion box", if you give the people an area to offer their ideas or generally vent with the hope of being heard, it tends to diffuse the angered.  Lastly, if you have individuals that are highly divisive and argumentative and continually post 1 star, or get their comments waived, let the site public know who they are by showing their level of issue by coloring their picture, tag line or bio whatever it is called, red=hot/argumentative, yellow/approach with caution, green/open minded.  Yes all these "gradings" are a form of censorship in a way, but letting the public posters know, who they are dealing with, might cut down on the rant's emotions, and outright anger shown on this site.  Just a thought.

February 22, 2009
Click to view ldk's profile
ldk

I'll also be at work.  CNN why can't we do this when everyone can participate?

 

As for ratings, why not just use a thumbs up or down which is common for most other sites similar to this?  Maybe some are getting a little too wrapped up in how many stars or comments a post gets.

February 22, 2009
Click to view rosehips's profile

including a thumbs down will not eliminate the bandit. Having just a thumbs up would.

February 22, 2009

The problem is iReporters who wage personal and political attacks on innocent people by organized swarming to their iReports and collectively driving down and skewing iReport Star Ratings as a tactic of iReport Warfare.

 

They presently get away with it.

 

Why? iReport.com Software allows people to post star ratings Anonymously. They are free to do their dirty rat work in the dark so no one can know who they are.

 

CNN needs to fix the software to provide a "DROP DOWN BOX" (well known software geek term) that SHOWS EACH STAR RATER's ID and the RATING THEY LEFT. The Drop Down Box only opens when you click on it to display the list of Star Raters.

 

The StarRater DropDownBox can be made only visable to CNN for problem investigations.

February 22, 2009

I only have one worry with the 1 star system that this would benefit 'popular' posters disproportionately, not that the current system does not already do that.  A thumbs up/down system where only the thumbs up votes are used to place the system could eliminate the bandit.

 

My reasoning:  You can have a post with 20 thumbs ups and no thumbs down, and one with 20 thumbs up and 50 thumbs down.  That is information I would like to be aware of.

 

Both posts would however be side by side in the highest rated column.

February 22, 2009

SPK - add 5 hours:

 

11:00am ET = 4:00PM GMT

February 22, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Great thanks.

February 22, 2009
Click to view larena's profile

i agree i join this star CNN has to change and become more RIGID on rules, they should ask for ID, PHOTO AND PASSPORT NUMBERS

so to stop stalkers, bad people and nad influence here on cnn

and people that are just here to spread venom

thanks LARENA

February 22, 2009
Click to view larena's profile

TYPO CORRECTION AND BAD INFLUENCE

February 22, 2009
Click to view larena's profile

DAVID W  i think is great,and about time this being fixed, no more attacks to no one please,you know i am a walking proove of the hate and the abuse and the stalkers to my persona so DAVID W i can only say thank you so much and God bless you

LARENA

February 22, 2009
Click to view Southerner01's profile

Personally, I think the multiple accounts users who put multiple rating on the same post should be banned. Other than that, I think the current system is pretty good. There are some pretty offensive people on iReports and it is nice to be able to indicate that you think so, without having to worry whether they will retaliate by one starring every report you've ever posted.

 

Keep the star system, ban the multiple account abusers!

February 22, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Personaly I think the rating system needs scrapped. At least as it stands.

 

I think users that "whine" (not my word but another persons) about others whining should be slapped on the wrists. Same goes for "Those who personaly attack should be..." who we all know have done just that, should be marked with a big red sign for an icon saying "That's You That Is" in an attempt to show them up and maybe stop the hypocrital nonsensce that comes out when a debate about name calling comes out.

February 22, 2009

Please do away with the rating system altogether. People get voted down the minute they post their story. It's not right. I bet those people who rate don't even read or listen to the words. It brings down the morale of the whole site. I feel like I should hear jaws music everytime I check my videos or posts. lol If I don't like a post I move on to the next one.

February 22, 2009

I bet one day there is going to be a tshirt that says One Star Bandit on it.

February 22, 2009
Click to view Margot707's profile

Gee whiz - My latest posts all had perfect 5* scores this morning. I blew the whistle on someone for plagerizing today (the post got pulled) and now my posts' overall scores are down to 4*. How petty. Meow.

February 22, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

That happen Marg. Just another reson to be rid of the star system

February 22, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Its amazing how many can copy and paste rules and regulations but not have any real grasp of them. Or of any sort of morality about just walking off with concepts, artworks, or just ideas in general.

February 22, 2009

My most recent post specifically requested no stars as to the nature of the post, I felt it was more important for the people who wanted to leave their comments to do so. Still the star thing was happening-and it was pointed out by another ireporter that the 1 star bandit hit my post as well. I actually had to laugh.  I don't post for ratings, but rather to either discuss current events or share some of my photos.  I know ratings are important to some people-but this current set up seems to be a great source of aggravation for many. I guess what might be considered a 5 star report to one, is a 1 star to another.  I don't know. But I guess if it's going to continue be a problem-maybe do away with the whole thing, and just go by the # of comments left to the post itself.

February 22, 2009

I think the problem is with the ireporters. We have been here doing this free of charge and making CNN one of the most popular news sites on the web...Most of you have taken ownership of this site...I mean look at all the sugestions on how to make it better for you. This is an outlet for us to express how we feel not a place to be forced to feel how you do.

 

CNN should just make a set of rules and we will either accept those rules and play by those rules or we will find another place to express ourselves. Personally, I like it the way it is. Thank you for the adventure....and thank you ireporters for the dicussions and debates. Please stop bickering because I want to like you all.

February 23, 2009

I will not be able to participate in tomorrow's blog, so here are my 2 cents.  In my opinion, the star rating should be scraped and not replaced with any alternative. When I first came to iReport, I paid no attention to the ratings.  I looked for reports based on subject matter, searching under tags.  Then one day, I realized one of my iReports had 4 stars.  It made me proud.  As I commented on the iReports of others, (and this about 2 weeks after my iReport with the 4 star rating), I noticed that my iReport had been reduced to 3 stars, although there were no recent comments.

 

Therefore, the conclusion I have drawn is that certain people use the star rating to reflect their personal like or dislike of the iReporter, regardless of the quality of the iReport. 

 

Many iReporters of like mind follow each other.  Even with one account, if the number in any group is greater than the other, smaller groups will always end up with lower ratings.

February 23, 2009
Click to view janmarbol's profile

thanks!!

February 23, 2009
Click to view Ryn's profile
Ryn

I like the idea of no star rating system, or just a one star rating. If the reader likes the post rate with one star, or do not rate at all.

As long as someone can rate down a post they will for one reason or another.

I would also like to see the requirements for the Superstar status changed OR be done away with all together.

If it is kept, I would like to see the rules required to make superstar posted somewhere and not just "Activity on the site"

It is crazy that only a commenter with no posts of their own can achieve superstar if they have only harassed caused strife and vulgarity on the site.

A reporter should have "so many posts" before they are considered a superstar. A one time mega hit wonder should not qualify(In my opinion)

Original posts, photos and videos should be considered, not cut and paste web stories.

Someone that has taken the time to write an original story, take photos and video are ireporters not a copy and paste artist.

In the beginning we all had to earn superstar status, really earn it. It was an honor, now it seems to be a curse to be on the front page or in the top 30. It appears to be a joke and we are most often targeted.

Some are put down because we do not all have headline news articles, or our posts are not worthy because they are not politically motivated.

The travel, off beat, nature and fun posts are considered a waste of time by some.

I feel it needs to be made clear that all original posts, photos and videos have the possibility for CNN vetting no matter the subject( as long as it is legal)

not just headline news topics.

The majority of us are not professional journalists, photographers or reporters, that is the beauty of iReport. It gives the average person a chance.

Thanks for hearing all of us.

February 23, 2009

The following links might be of interest to this discussion:

 

Life With Alacrity: Using 5-Star Rating Systems (edited for brevity)

 

http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2006/08/using_5star_rat.html

 

Using 5-Star Rating Systems

 

 

Stars_1

 

Unfortunately 5-point rating scales also face many challenges in their use, and different studies suggest different flaws with this particular methodology.

 

First, one study using Amazon data has shown that many undetailed ratings (where the rater isn't required to add any additional information other than the rating they select) show a bimodal distribution.  In other words the distribution of ratings tends to cluster around two different numbers (e.g., 1 and 5) rather than offering a normal distribution where the ratings cluster around a single height (e.g., 3). Thus the median of these ratings is not an accurate reflection of product quality, but instead is a statement of conflicting opinions.

 

Thus even when a bimodal distribution is not a problem, on a 5-point scale the upward bias often results in only 2 or 3 meaningful data points. This is problematic because it minimizes differentiation. In many cases, a 5-star rating system where most of the ratings are either 3 or 4 is actually no better then just a thumbs-up/thumbs-down rating system.

 

 

http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2006/08/using_5star_rat.html

 

However, given that 5-point scales are probably here to stay, we are forced to make the best use of them we can.

 

First, we need to provide raters with incentives, so that they provide meaningful ratings. We've already seen that this can be done by requesting detailed ratings: when a person takes the time to write text, and knows that his name will be attached to it, he generally does a better job in his rating. There are other possible incentives techniques as well, such as RPGnet's new XP System.

 

 

 

And this:

 

 

 

eBay allows you to leave positive, negative, or (more recently) neutral feedback for each transaction you conduct in their society. These are aggregated into two numbers. "Feedback Score" is calculated as unique positive feedback received minus unique negative feedback received, and results in a whole number like "32" or "10,302". "Positive Feedback" is calculated as positive feedback received divided by all feedback received, and results in a percentage like "100%" or "99.8%".

 

Unfortunately, for reasons discussed below, almost all feedback is positive, and thus the Feedback Score acts almost entirely as a track record of how many trades someone has made. The Feedback Score could be largely replaced by that single number. You can look at a score of "27", and say, "That's an amateur trader, or someone just getting started", at a score of "3", and say, "That person may or may not know what they're doing", at a score of "10,302", and say, "That person has done a lot of trades." But you still don't know how good the trader is.

 

Theoretically, the Positive Feedback percentage should give a more meaningful number, but people so infrequently give bad ratings that, even when they do appear, they look like noise. Does a percentage of "99.8%" on a user with a score of "1,762" mean that the seller has a genuine problem or not? Do those 3 unhappy customers really represent another 30 who were unwilling to actually click the negative feedback? And, did those people have slightly bad experience or really bad experiences? It's pretty hard to say.

 

This was also interesting:

 

http://www.skotos.net/articles/TTnT_/TTnT_196.phtml

 

 

#3: Trust Content

 

As Chris recently discussed, an Amazon study found that undetailed ratings showed bimodal distributions, while we've discovered that our own detailed reviews showed bell-curve distributions. This suggests another thing to trust in ratings: content.

 

If someone just rates an item with a number, that's likely to be less accurate than just rating an item with a number and a short notes and that's likely to be less accurate than just writing a full review of an item. Or so we surmise from our data thus far.

 

As a result it makes sense to give plain ratings a lower weight and full reviews a higher weight. It's yet another easy and mechanistic way to measure who you trust.

February 23, 2009
Click to view mab91c's profile

Many of the reports above keep referring to "those people" "certain people", etc. Funny, from those of the far right and the far left all you need do is change a few words around and you have the same type of iReport. If I can join in today, I will, but as ldk stated, I too shall be working, so I'll give a quick thought. Before being allowed to give any rating to anyone, you must have a profile of some type. Also, I'd like to see either one star only or the thumbs up/down. That, however, will see the same abuse from those on both sides who cry foul. "He/She gives me a thumbs down all the time" will be the next issue.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Pretty much most reporters in here can accuse other reporters of almost anything i the way of "hypocrites" and or "name callers" and be at least partialy right.

 

1 "reporter" however has gone to a new low. Using other iReporters original work with no reference to the original source or permission.

 

Well you may say, surely that is covered in THE LAW.

It is but there is much more to it than this.

 

The original concept of the animation, slogan and article where conceived for 1 purpose. All of these where hijacked by 1 reporter for a purely MEMEME article in a desperate attempt to pick up on the popularity of the original post.

 

The animator/designer (me) was listed by the writer (auntiebj) and I am easy to find. Certainly anyone in iReports can find me if it my work was sourced from here.

 

So, this reporter has not even had the decency to ask. Not the decency to even acknowlege or credit the original source, writer or designer. That is just how mean spirited some are.

 

Anyone that can do that can never say they have the good of iReport in mind.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

When mentioned on the offending "report" to either get permission or list the original credits/source and dint, the "report was removed but not after the offending "reporter" qouted all the "LAWS".

 

This report is now back up. CNN, you are responsable for letting other iReporters do this and you cannot expect anyone to go out of their way to contribute original material when this happens.

 

Please address this comment.

February 23, 2009

David;

 

It's my hope that some of this will end in something positive. I received an email about a few post here, -- includiung this blog -- and so came back to comment and see for myself. Examples of how the system "doesn't" work too well are far too easy to show and create, as examples.., I believe you've caught them.

 

I'm glad it's in your hands now, you're obviously very capable, responsive and caring.

 

I'll be sure to check in and watch the happenings at 11:00 today. I feel your efforts will be appreciated by those with concerns, etc.

 

Thanks again.

 

TW

February 23, 2009
Click to view yorksnbeans's profile

The star system is useless as part of a system to acknowledge the quality or popularity of a report. I vote to get rid of it entirely.  The amount of views and comments is a good enough indicator in many cases. I also feel that CNN should have their finger in it as well since they tend to read many reports.  They should be able to highlight a good report on the newsiest if they feel it is worthy, and not just rely on a computer to pick and choose. That way, new users who haven't acquired a following can also receive acknowledgement.

February 23, 2009
Click to view yorksnbeans's profile

one other thought...the one star bandit is only one problem with the system. There are also users who rate themselves repeatedly using multiple accounts to get on the newsiest which is another abuse of the system.

February 23, 2009

There seems to be two kinds of ireporters.

 

Ireporters who post stories must have confirmed identity to be "vetted" and if an ireport is on cnn, CNN has your personal information.

 

And then there are all of the rest of the ireporters who have no identity on the line.

 

We ireporters who have submitted our personal information and remain transparent suffer the driveby commentors and hit and run star ratings. (I use the word 'suffer' lightly)

 

For the sake of both types of ireporter, I suggest this.

 

Let it be known how each Ireporter rates, comments, and views stories.

 

What if on ireporters' profile page, anyone can not only view all of the stories posted by said ireporter, but also view all of the ratings and comments left by said ireporter?

 

 

transparency, acountability, anyone?

 

my 2 bits

 

BTW, I am not complaining, I love this site as is.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Chances are if people dont have anonimity they wont rate some reporters for fear of creating a "star wars" (I hope that doesn't break copyright).

February 23, 2009

I would like to see that star rating system gone! It serves no purpose at all. I would much rather see you have an automatic count done on the number of comments made on the posts. The comments are what drives the system isn't it? stars have proven to be faulty as no matter what post do or visit..the one star bandit has been there, which tells me someone has the capability to be doing this to everyone! Not a good feeling at all.

I would also like to see multiple ID's gone too. Why would anyone need more than one ID? unless they are part of the group causing a lot of problems on the posts. One ID per person..With the technology these days I'm sure this can be accomplished.

I think the removal of certain people from this site, gvscmr and allowing others who continue to cause problems to stay is wrong.

February 23, 2009

I would also like to see a faster response to ridding posts of the nastiest comments I have ever seen in my life on a website! cursing, personal attacks on the authors of the posts. It has gotten way out of control. How quickly after the flagging of a very nasty comment, and I am not talking about bantering back and forth comments. I mean the most disgusting evil you can imagine being contantly spewed out directed at the person who put up the post. The people that do this don't even read the post..they just see who did the post and attack! It I hope will stop. This site is a great place and I have enjoyed it for the last 5 1/2 months. I hope it will get even better with a few minor changes to the site.

One ID per person

People with no profile at all, no commenting on posts, viewing only and that can be a separate count as well.

Get rid of the star rating system

Use Comments as the count

Thanks David Williams for the time you are spending on this dilema. I hope things will improve soon.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Somrthing that may be worth considering is a self policing ratings system.

 

Just like in the movies. From PG (No bad launguge or name calling) to XXX (I think you get it).

 

This would allow for a certain ammount of more aggressive debate where the author felt appropriate.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

If name calling and abusive language is such a problem an XXX rating on an article would solve that easily as it wouldn't be a reason for complaint.

February 23, 2009
Click to view takamine69's profile

Davidw,

 

I personally think the star system is a waste of time and I rarely use it,

 

Here’s why,

 

  • The majority of iReports are politically based and iReporters will naturally base their ranking on weather they agree politically regardless of if the information is factual. I see absolutely no way to avoid this, especially since everyone is so polarized.

 

  • The five star system is actually even more pointless because most iReporters that use it only give FIVE stars or ONE star. This again is usually based on their political leanings.

 

Re:MULTIPLE ID'S

 

  • When I first joined iReports I noticed right away that many people had multiple id's, in fact to me at the time it seemed like everyone did.

So I myself created multiple id's thinking this was the norm. I currently only use one for several reasons. First because after having multiple id's I can see how it's not really a legitimate way to debate and secondly I really don't even have time to keep up with one id.

 

In closing,

I believe we should do away with the star system or at most have a Star or no star system. - If you decide to keep one it will still for the most part be a popularity contest.

Multiple IDs - I agree everyone should have only one ID.

 

 

THE BIGGEST PROBLEM:

is neither of those things in my mind.

The biggest problem is the "gang" mentality of both right and left wing groups.

If someone is on an iReport and posts an opinion contrary to everyone else it becomes a feeding frenzy and the personal attacks start flowing. The important point to make here is that it comes from all sides.

 

Thanks,

February 23, 2009
Click to view ldk's profile
ldk

Hi David, why should we be able to rate iReport articles anyway?  We can't rate CNN or Fox articles.  Do away with the star system or just use something binary like thumbs up or down.  Too many folks are getting wrapped around these ratings and can't seem to take criticism very well.  Just my $0.02.

February 23, 2009
Click to view Picco's profile

The star system is flawed to begin with.  What are the criteria that people are using to generate these “stars”?  If you like the piece from a newsworthy standpoint?  If you agree with its slant?  If you like/dislike the IReporter?  There is no way to truly ascertain this difference in what is driving the ratings.  I say eliminate the rating system all together and the problem is solved.

February 23, 2009
Click to view rosehips's profile

I support Kallenart's suggestion that I have seen her express for some time: reduce the rating system to simply one star, or a thumb up. If a viewer likes the post, they can say so and the one star bandits will be disarmed.

I also think voting female's idea that complete anonymity be removed from raters through a drop-down box is another good option. I don't want viewers to be aware of how we rate, but cnn can track those who are indiscriminate one star raters who maliciously rate low for some sort of sinister reasons. Multiple id's would be difficult to prevent, so I don't know what the best way to avoid this.

February 23, 2009
Click to view mab91c's profile

Hey, all, not sure how long I will be here (at work now) but I echo many of the thoughts above. If you are going to keep the star rating system, I would like to see it changed to where only those with a profile in place can rate. That would stop some of the "one and run" people here. There has to be a way for CNN to keep the essential information private (as in my profile) so I don't see the problem in doing so to all.

February 23, 2009
Click to view mab91c's profile

Rose - Why should people be upset if someone can see how they have been rated? I would welcome anyone seeing my ratings for them. Seems that only ones that would not like this are they "one and run" people out there. Also, if you changed it to a thumbs up or down, you would have the same problem. Certain individuals would come in, thumbs down someone immediately without even reading the post and move on. I personally feel if the rating system is continued, make it public for all to see.

February 23, 2009
Click to view ldk's profile
ldk

Yes, since yesterday's big discussion on this I'm making it a habit to tell someone how I rated them and why.  I dont like being accused of hiding behind anonymity.  As far as having personally identifiable information in my profile, you can forget it.

February 23, 2009
Click to view rosehips's profile

mab, there's another blog that David Williams is moderating right now. It's the newest one.

February 23, 2009
Click to view ldk's profile
ldk

Where's the right blog for this discussion?  We make ourselves available to talk and we've been told to go to the wrong spot?

February 23, 2009
Click to view davidw's profile

Hi everybody,

Just wanted to let ya'll know that we're having the round table discussion in another post at the top of the blog.

I'll go back and read these comments, but won't be replying immediately.

Thanks for the heads up rosehips.

February 23, 2009
Click to view KarmaHD's profile

Too many motives, and ways around the rating system for it's effect to be valuable.  Suggestions listed above, additional suggestions, News Clippers, heading, for those who insist on posting outside source material without a story, in addition to placing a color on the posters tag as suggested, tally the total of ratings and place the average on the posters Bio (if you keep the star system). Expand site to offer IM capability for those who just cannot get their point across without an argument, (security problems).  Allow the posters to have a tag line of what group/tribe/political party they are affiliated with, this might focus the "arguments" to their party line defenses.  Reward new's, reward opinion, break the two out.  Quantify Newisest?

February 23, 2009
Click to view mab91c's profile

SPK - I feel your rating system (PG to XXX) would definately not work here. Since I've been on iReports, I've found, for the most part, it is a way to discuss various ideas, thoughts, political parties, family, etc in an open and civil manner. Yes, while many on both sides abuse that, such is life and if everyone were to follow the ToU and reported them, they would be gone. Going to a XXX site, while possible within the realm of "free speech" I could only foresee problems with that. Something my mother used to say does well here "Free speech does not mean free from consequences."

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Multiple IDs should be relatively easy to spot in most cases.

 

The star rating system will always be open to abuse and as such removing it may be a better idea until something better can be worked out.

February 23, 2009

The stars are only the tip of this iceburg. There are other things that go with this action being done by someone or a group..just do away with it..I would be more concerned about the abusive language personal attacks and name calling on the posts. Can something technical be done about that too? I do not believe that calling people names, attacking the author of posts and using abusive language on this site comes under the freedom of speech..does it? To me it's abusing that freedom on a website where thousands of people from all over the world read these posts and use this website. People seem to be only into if you are on this side or that side of the political world and it is desruptive to anyone having a different opinion on either of the parties..you get called names and then attacked on any post you go to..These people follow others around the site causing problems..for everyone.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

Fair comment mab. I didnt mean XXX would require foul language but that it would be reasonably tolerated.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

A good example, mab, being the discretion option when posting image/vieo.

 

You have to click the ok button to view and as such cant complain about being offended by the content (within CNN's paramaters of course).

February 23, 2009
Click to view mab91c's profile

SPK, Sorry if I misinterpreted what you meant. I understand that at times it would be OK to have a more "open" discussion, however I can see how it would go down the slippery slope and get personal very fast.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

If you will keep the ratings system, here is a thought...

 

If the problem is that a 1 rating by a few dodgy individuals is being used to distort things then change the rating values.

 

Any rating is worth 2. You then add the rating itself. This way not rating at all is the best thing you can do ifyou dont like an article.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

I think it might too mab but maybe it is worth a thought. It would still have to have a set of conditions applied but maybe a bit looser than what is supposed to be in place at the minute.

February 23, 2009

I would like to see Video's and Picture I-Reports placed into two different buckets.

 

If I take the time and effort to do research and commentary and then make a video.  I do not want it burried behind 200 pictures of the Oscars which was uploaded by cell phone.

 

In the future I will try and post my issues on slow gossip news days.

February 23, 2009

I have a problem with the foul language attacks etc because a person has taken time and effort to put up a post and to have people on there screaming using large bold colored fonts, foul language, personal attacking the author and the others on the post commenting is just so insulting to the person who did the post! To me there needs to be an automatic delete of the person's comments if using foul language or racist comments, and for the attacks of the author or other people commenting, the person who did the post can have the option of deleting the troll like comments is that simple at all?? or too much work technically?? It is all getting to be rediculous..

February 23, 2009

Reading the comments about ratings, the duplicating of videos designed by iReporters, personal attacks, etc., can be summed up as committed by mean-spirited participants.  Any rating system stands to be abused as long as there are mean-spirited participants. Exposing the identity of those rating their iReports will only expose those raters to retribution by the mean-spirited ones.  David Williams, I truly appreciate your concern regarding this matter, but you are not a social worker neither counselor. To eliminate abuse of the rating system, it will need to be removed.

February 23, 2009
Click to view SPK's profile
SPK

I have to go eat but will be back later.

February 23, 2009

As far as the rating goes....People who cares.

 

If you think you are complaining and moaning now about not knowing who gave you the one star.

 

Just think how much BM&W you are going to be doing once you find out who gave you the one star.

 

Then all the comments will be about either defending the one star rating, justifying the 5 star rating and everywhere in between.

 

Instead of talking about the issue at hand.

 

Oh yea.....and lets put video and pictures separate....dumping everything into one central location is not the best place for people who actually put forth an effort into their reports, instead of people just copying and pasting pictures or words.

 

It would be nice to be able to get political views out to the masses without having to be in competition with who was the best and worst dressed at the Oscars.

 

The two just do not go together.

 

And the more people you have posting on this site, the more good reports are going to be burried behind some fluff peice or picture of someones back yard.

 

I would offer up this.

 

Each story has once choice on where to put it.

 

You Choose 1 of the 4 sections for your story

World News

US News/Crime

Politics/Business

Entertainment/Health/Tech/Travel/Living

 

HOLD ON.....I am Copying this FROM CNN.

 

What a great idea.

 

If you place I-Reports into these buckets you will find that you will have a lot less random people clicking on stories which they have no interest in.

 

Like I would never purposely go into the Entertainment Bucket, because I really dont care what goes on in Hollywood.

 

I could keep all my comments and ratings in stories which I dont have to fight through 50 I-reports of stuff which I dont want to see.

 

thanks

February 23, 2009
Click to view Margot707's profile

I agree with Mrfloridad about having different sections. Its frustrating to work on a post and then get it buried when someone uploads a camera load of pictures of the full moom that flood iReports and buries regular posts.

 

To cut out the anonymous fly by 1 star tags, someone should have to leave a comment to be able to rate the post and their rating should be next to their comment. It could be a simple thimbs up or thumbs down.

 

Yesterday, when I expressed my disapproval on someone's post, all of my posts where hit with one stars which knocked my latest post out of the "Highest Ratest" spot. Why would someone come in days or weeks later and play such games if not out of spite. If a comment was required, and therefore created a time stamp, this kind of behavior could be cut to a minimum.

 

I'm dismayed at the number of people who are leaving or who have been bounced for no apparent good reason and others who continue to undermine the spirit of iReports are allowed to stay.

February 23, 2009
Click to view woodfoe's profile

An association of men who will not quarrel with one another is a thing which has never yet existed, from the greatest confederacy of nations down to a town meeting or a vestry.

Thomas Jefferson

 

As far as a rating system it kind of reminds me of kindergarten when you got gold stars. I say trash it.

 

I don't know many a soldier have died defending free speech. On the other hand their is a public policy of not using foul language on the public air waves.

 

I'm sure what ever is decided will be fine.

February 25, 2009
Click to view amarguriro's profile

its cool, hope by this the site would be improved

February 28, 2009
Click to view oldschool61's profile

I believe I have the distinction of posting the first iReport on the problem with the ratings system.  My report, "Lone Star Bandit;Spawn of the Devil"  http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-177838 never actually addressed a solution it just brought the problem to light.  One solution might be as I have heard suggested that there be a single star rating system in which a person gave you a star if they liked your post and none if they did not or did not care to rate it.

March 11, 2009
Click to view kaylalauren's profile

Bank of America, should be renamed,"Sink of America", for 5 months I have being trying to contact my case manager Mr. Joe Daniels and would believe after 5 months of calling repeatedly the Loss Mitigation Dept. I receive a letter February 25th, stating I need to apply again, I called on the 9th, of March I found out I was taken out of the program without ever speaking with Mr. Daniels. I now again have to resubmit my information again for assistance on my mortgage. I have spoken with so my people asking what did I do wrong or where did I go wrong, no answer can be given except an appology and that I just have to resubmit if I need assistance.

I do not know what else to do, however I am not giving up hope, but need to let others know that there is no real help out there and that regardless of what our President my say that we can recieve assistance at Sink of America there is no way to receive any help but you are guaranteed the run around.

 

sincerely

Pia

December 4, 2009
Click to view lovingsky's profile
as cheap swiss two instrumental consequences. # Firstly, phenomenon placed # within a comment Rado Replica Watches crimp is to fake swiss be to represent # fully ignored, due replica watches to comments will replica swiss appear as misled A Lange & Sohne 1815 Walter Lange Mens Watch 223.021 watch directly during parsing. # in that comments swiss made watches are recurrently used Mont Blanc Replica Watches imprint HTML to “hide” unwanas Marc Jacobs handbags designer handbag two instrumental consequences. Chanel handbags handbag Shopping for less Firstly, phenomenon placed designer bags within a comment Marc Jacobs handbags knockoffs crimp is to Prada 7876 Gold/Black 7876-04 be to represent designer replica handbags fully ignored, due Designers Replica handbag gucci 212572ET74G7666 to comments will replica Gucci Mini Flap French Wallet Black 112716 appear as misled best replica bags directly during parsing. Giant Silver hardware Shopping for less in that comments Chloe handbags handbag Shopping for less are recurrently used Mulberry handbags knockoffs imprint HTML to Prada handbags handbag Shopping for less “hide” unwan
December 21, 2009
December 25, 2009
December 29, 2009
Click to view asdsadasd's profile
tempered glasslaminated glassinsulated glassmarble composite slabsheet metal punching partshardware punching partschina crystal machinerychina crystal machinerybiometric fingerprint door lock 上海房租发票拓展训练电焊机企业宣传片企业宣传片制作等离子切割机焊机相贯线相贯线切割机数控相贯线切割机数控相贯线切割机相贯线切割机相贯线数控等离子切割机数控切割机数控火焰切割机数控等离子切割机北京影视制作公司北京影视广告公司等离子切割机便携式数控切割机数控等离子切割机数控切割机 our Christian Louboutin supply Christian Louboutin is buy Christian Louboutin or cheap Christian Louboutin are u fine Autumn Collection or Classic Collectionsome Fashion Collection pumps shoesjust for cheap pumps shoes and Christian Louboutin pumps.we also heave christian shoes and christian pumpsour product as follows :christian louboutin sandals|sandals|women sandals|high sandals|women Short Boots|Short Boots|special shoes|Tall Boots|Christian Louboutin Tall Boots|tall boot |women Tall Boots some Christian Louboutin supply Christian Louboutin or buy Christian Louboutin and cheap Christian Louboutin are u fine Autumn Collection or Classic Collectionsome Fashion Collection pumps shoesjust for cheap pumps shoes and Christian Louboutin pumps.we also heave christian shoes and christian pumpsour product as follows :christian louboutin sandals|sandals|women sandals|high sandals|women Short Boots|Short Boots|special shoes|Tall Boots|Christian Louboutin Tall Boots|tall boot |women Tall Boots BATBL50L6 | PA3128U-1BRS | PA3191-2BAS | PA3191U-1BAS | PA3191U-1BRS | PA3191U-2BRS | PA3191U-3BAS | PA3191U-3BRS | PA3191U-4BAS | PA3191U-4BRS | PA3191U-5BRS | PA3356U-1BAS | PA3356U-1BRS | PA3356U-2BAS | PA3356U-2BRS | PA3356U-3BAS | PA3356U-3BRS | PA3456U-1BRS | PA3588U-1BRS | PABAS048 | PABAS049 | PABAS054 | PABAS066 | PABAS071 | PA3399U-1BAS | PA3399U-1BRS | PA3399U-2BAS | PA3399U-2BRS | PA3400U-1BAS | PA3400U-1BRL | PA3400U-1BRS | PA3478U-1BAS | PA3478U-1BRS | PABAS057 | PABAS076 | PABAS077 | PA3451U-1BRS | PA3457U-1BRS | PABAS067 | 312-0292 | 312-0326 | 312-0335 | G9812 | H9566 | HD438 | PA2487 | PA2487U | PA2487URG | PA3107U | PA3107U-1BAS | PA3107U-1BRS | PABAS011 | PA2522U | PA2522U-1BAS | PA2522U-1BRS | PA3383U | PA3383U-1BAS | PA3383U-1BRS | PA3451U-1BRS | PABAS067 | PA3465U-1BRS | PABAS069 | PA3450U-1BRS | PA3399U-1BAS | PA3399U-1BRS | PA3399U-2BAS | PA3399U-2BRS | PA3478U-1BAS | PA3478U-1BRS | PABAS057 | PABAS076 | PABAS077 | BTP-58A1 | BTP-59A1 | BTP-60A1 | BTP-84A1 | BTP-85A1 | LC.BTP01.003 | LC.BTP03.002 | 3UR18650Y-2-QC236 | PA3593U-1BAS | PA3594U-1BRS | PA3595U-1BRM | PA3595U-1BRS | PABAS111 | PA3593U-1BAS | PA3594U-1BRS | PA3536U-1BRS | PA3537U-1BAS | PA3537U-1BRS | PABAS100 | PABAS101 | PA3420U-1BAC | PA3420U-1BAS | PA3420U-1BRS | PA3450U-1BRS | PA3506U-1BAS | PA3506U-1BRS | PABAS059 | FPCBP115 | 292389-001|338794-001|342661-001|345027-001|346970-001|350836-001|361742-001|364602-001|365750-004| 367759-001|371785-001|371786-001|372772-001|381373-001|381374-001|383220-001|383510-001|383615-001|395789-001| 395789-002|395789-003| 396008-001|398876-001|403808-001|411462-421|412779-001|416996-131|417066-001|434045-141|434674-001| 441675-001|DM842A|DP390A|DP399A|EF419A|EG417AA|EV087AA|EV088AA|EX941AA|EX942AA| F1466A|F1739A|F2019A|F2019B|F2024A|F2024B|F2098|F2098A|F2299A|F3172A| F3408H|F3459H|F4098A|F4307H|F4308H|F4309H|F4486B|F4809A|F4812A|HSTNN-DB02| HSTNN-DB06|HSTNN-DB11|HSTNN-DB20|HSTNN-DB36|HSTNN-FB21|HSTNN-IB0|HSTNN-IB04|HSTNN-IB09|HSTNNIB12| HSTNN-IB20|HSTNN-IB39|HSTNN-LB11|HSTNN-LB31|HSTNN-OB06|HSTNN-OB20|HSTNN-OB71|HSTNN-UB02|HSTNN-UB11|PB991A|PB992A|PB994A|PB995A|PF723A|PM579A|PP2182D|PP2182L|
March 17, 2010
You must be logged in to post a comment.



About the iReport Blog

The latest and greatest on CNN iReport, brought to you by Team iReport.


Categories Recent posts Monthly Subscribe