Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

OT: How to calculate reputation scores?

44 views
Skip to first unread message

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 12:51:49 PM5/22/12
to
General question (not LISP related):

Many web sites have an article/message/user reputation based on the up or
down votes the article/message/user receives. How is a reputation score
calculated given only up and down votes? (The user is not presented with
a 1 to 5 scale for scoring something.)

Mike

Kaz Kylheku

unread,
May 22, 2012, 1:28:53 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
> General question (not LISP related):

Not Lisp-related -> does not really belong here.

> Many web sites have an article/message/user reputation based on the up or
> down votes the article/message/user receives. How is a reputation score
> calculated given only up and down votes? (The user is not presented with
> a 1 to 5 scale for scoring something.)

Sixth grade dropout?

Alex Mizrahi

unread,
May 22, 2012, 1:38:54 PM5/22/12
to
Up = 1, down = -1. Calculate average.

There are also statistics-based methods which, presumably, give more
accurate/better answer.

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 1:53:55 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
>> General question (not LISP related):
>
> Not Lisp-related -> does not really belong here.

Hence the OT: in the subject.

>> Many web sites have an article/message/user reputation based on the up or
>> down votes the article/message/user receives. How is a reputation score
>> calculated given only up and down votes? (The user is not presented with
>> a 1 to 5 scale for scoring something.)
>
> Sixth grade dropout?

Be nice. I asked here because I have found interesting opinions and answers here.

Mike

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 1:56:28 PM5/22/12
to
I thought about a simple sum that is normalized between zero and
five. The thought comes from a recent book I read that refers to an
individual's reputation as "voted" on by others. I was thinking the
simplist computationally is tracking the net sum and the total votes
then something like ((net / total) * 5). Seems simplistic.

Mike

Kaz Kylheku

unread,
May 22, 2012, 2:04:19 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
>>> General question (not LISP related):
>>
>> Not Lisp-related -> does not really belong here.
>
> Hence the OT: in the subject.

So being off topic is wrong only if you don't know you're off topic.

Just like the way you can park your car anywhere, just as long as you know
you're not supposed to, and you have the all-important flashers on.

Gotcha.

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 2:07:46 PM5/22/12
to
Considering your rebutting with a straw man argument, attempting to
compare a question with something illegal, I suppose your logic is valid.

(setq asinine-argument 'reductio-ad-absurdum)

Mike

Barry Margolin

unread,
May 22, 2012, 2:25:27 PM5/22/12
to
In article <201205221...@kylheku.com>,
Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote:

> On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
> > On 2012-05-22, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote:
> >> On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
> >>> General question (not LISP related):
> >>
> >> Not Lisp-related -> does not really belong here.
> >
> > Hence the OT: in the subject.
>
> So being off topic is wrong only if you don't know you're off topic.

Whether it's right or wrong isn't the point. Your reply was useless,
since it just told him (and us) something he already knew and admitted.

An "OT" qualifier in Usenet is an apology in advance for what is hoped
to be a minor slight. It's kind of like prefacing a something with "No
offense intended, but...".

--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 2:29:22 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <201205221...@kylheku.com>,
> Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
>> > On 2012-05-22, Kaz Kylheku <k...@kylheku.com> wrote:
>> >> On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
>> >>> General question (not LISP related):
>> >>
>> >> Not Lisp-related -> does not really belong here.
>> >
>> > Hence the OT: in the subject.
>>
>> So being off topic is wrong only if you don't know you're off topic.
>
> Whether it's right or wrong isn't the point. Your reply was useless,
> since it just told him (and us) something he already knew and admitted.
>
> An "OT" qualifier in Usenet is an apology in advance for what is hoped
> to be a minor slight. It's kind of like prefacing a something with "No
> offense intended, but...".
>

Barry,

Thank you. I'm learning LISP and have found the posts and different ways
of thinking and approaching problems presented here interesting.

Mike

Zach KS

unread,
May 22, 2012, 2:32:47 PM5/22/12
to
I found this on Reddit or Hacker News long ago, not claiming I understand all of it, but it seems to address your question:

http://evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 2:40:59 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Zach KS <elz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:51:49 AM UTC-6, Mike wrote:
>> General question (not LISP related):
>>
>> Many web sites have an article/message/user reputation based on the up or
>> down votes the article/message/user receives. How is a reputation score
>> calculated given only up and down votes? (The user is not presented with
>> a 1 to 5 scale for scoring something.)
>>
>> Mike
>
> I found this on Reddit or Hacker News long ago, not claiming I understand all of it, but it seems to address your question:
>
> http://evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html

Thank you. I'll read that. I had not seen it.

Mike

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 3:00:04 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
I was referred to this article.

<http://evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html>

Mike

Chris Howey

unread,
May 22, 2012, 3:27:27 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Mike <mi...@mac.com> wrote:
Here's something I played with a while back that may help.

(defun score (votes &optional (prior (list 2 2 2 2 2)))
"Calculate a score based on the number of votes for each rank."
(let ((posterior (mapcar #'cons votes prior)))
(loop for (a . b) in posterior
for i from 1
summing (+ a b) into score-sum
summing (* i (+ a b)) into weighted-score
finally (return (float (/ weighted-score score-sum))))))

Check the following blog-post for info (in ruby):
http://masanjin.net/blog/how-to-rank-products-based-on-user-input

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 3:31:01 PM5/22/12
to
Great. I see your cited article is a sequel to <http://evanmiller.org/how-not-to-sort-by-average-rating.html>.

Thank you.

Mike

Mike

unread,
May 22, 2012, 3:49:14 PM5/22/12
to
On 2012-05-22, Chris Howey <how...@gmail.com> wrote:
Chris,

I had recently been looking at Bayesian stuff for something else.
Thank you for your code. I'll try this.

Mike

Björn Lindberg

unread,
May 23, 2012, 4:44:52 AM5/23/12
to
Mike <mi...@mac.com> writes:

> [...] ((net / total) * 5).

I was fine with your off topic thread up to this point. But this... this
is infix!


Björn Lindberg

Mike

unread,
May 25, 2012, 12:51:32 PM5/25/12
to
> Bj?rn Lindberg

You're right about the infix. I'm not yet converted to thinking in postfix.

Mike
0 new messages