Hi SCN team,
Maybe I don't have enough things to worry about, but I've been fascinated by the new "likes" mechanism and the fact that ratings = reputation points. I like the idea that your reputation is enhanced by the reaction you cause as a result of your content contributions. I think, in theory, its a better idea than just having some anonymous person inside SAP give out reputation points arbitrarily.
The reaction mechanisms and points don't make a lot of sense, however, when you think about them.
People understand a "like". Where likes get confusing is when it's paired with the 5 star rating system.
For content rating on a social media site, 5 stars doesn't really make any sense anyways - especially when they are the larger potential source of reputation points.
Consider the following:
1. Most people let content pass by them without any reaction, without even reading it (no reputation change)
2. Some people find content interesting enough to click into and read it, at least for a little bit (no reputation change)
3. Some people find something interesting enough in a blog to react to it by posting a comment (no reputation change)
4. Some people "like" the blog, did they read it very far? (2 pts reputation increase)
5. Some people, likely the same people as #4 like the blog so much they give it 5 stars (5 pts reputation increase, often 7 pts if includes a like)
6. Is 4 pts any much different than 5 pts? They're both really good reactions, but a comment is more meaningful but gets no points
7. Giving a 1 star rating means you think a blog sucks, but it gives more points than just ignoring
8. Is 2 pts any much different than 1 pt? Both are pretty bad reactions
9. What does 3 points mean? Is it the same as a non reaction? I think what star ratings are is thumbs up and thumbs down.
Based on the above, I suggest the following types of scoring, and changes to the rating system:
1. Reward audience building, a little bit. I'd give 0.1 pts per view. Or if you have to deal in integers, inflate the scoring x10, and give 1 pt per view. Platinum status wouldn't be recieved until you hit 25,000 pts (sounds more impressive, right?)
2. Give big rewards to blogs that receive comments (should be at least the same as a like/thumbs up, because someone cared to react to the blog, meaning they must have read it fairly closely).
3. Do away with the 5 star rating system, and replace with "thumbs up & thumbs down" Give 5 - 10 pts for each thumbs up. For thumbs down, either consider a penalty, or just use this as a mechanism to find bad content. Nobody will click on a blog that has 10 thumbs down ratings.
In the above system, if someone really loved a blog, they would view it (+.1 pts), give it a thumbs up (+10 pts), and comment on it (+10 pts) for a total contribution of 20.1 pts.
I think this will simplify the experience a bit, and reward reputation enticing others to react to your content in ways that really matter.
PS: You need to double or triple the reward for providing content. 10 pts for blog entry is too little. 20 is getting closer to right.
What does everyone else think?