Forum
Comments:
-
- on Fri 15 Jan 2010
- 01:35:19 PM UTC
Re: An individuals rating
You ´ll receive activity points for your activity, that means for rating websites, commenting and rating websites, and posting in the forum and on boards. And with reaching a certain number of points you´ll gain bronze, silver...blueberry cake.
Blueberrycake Level Member of the WOT Community
-
- on Fri 15 Jan 2010
- 01:35:56 PM UTC
Blueberrycake
is just a joke of course;)
Blueberrycake Level Member of the WOT Community
-
- on Fri 15 Jan 2010
- 02:51:27 PM UTC
Rookie - Beginner Bronze -
Rookie - Beginner
Bronze - 1500 - 3000 points
Silver - 3000 points - 6000 points
Gold - 6000 - 10000 points
Platinum - over 10000 pointsI think, don't hold me to this
_____________________________________________________
---------"Taking second just means you are the first one to lose"--------
Dale Earnhardt -
- on Fri 15 Jan 2010
- 02:53:51 PM UTC
Re: Levels
They are documented on our wiki.
-
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 09:55:03 PM UTC
that's all I needed to know
I've been wondering what that little point thing is for a few weeks.
thanks
-
- on Wed 06 Oct 2010
- 09:01:13 AM UTC
Thanx for the Info
Thanx for posting the WOT Rating criteria. Was looking for it all over the web.
I also believe its the same as what you have posted i.e.:
Rookie - Beginner
Bronze - 1500 - 3000 points
Silver - 3000 points - 6000 points
Gold - 6000 - 10000 points
Platinum - over 10000 pointsWell as per this I am about to reach the Gold membership status soon.
-
- on Fri 15 Jan 2010
- 10:15:57 PM UTC
Solved!
Ah hah... I have my answer! thanks ;-)
--
Scott Evans VK7HSE
http://www.vk7hse.hobby-site.org
PGP/GPG Key ID 437E00F9 -
- on Sat 16 Jan 2010
- 09:58:05 AM UTC
"ratings' influence"
Afaik, levels are just rough markerpoints. And so
the difference between 5999 and 6000 is minimal.However, these levels only indicate your general level of activity.
The system also calculates your reliability,
and that number is not public.Your ratings' influence depends
on your reliability, not activity...PS: Only platinum makes a difference = access to mass rating
PPS: And remember that the scale is logarithmic...
-
- on Sun 17 Jan 2010
- 12:51:36 AM UTC
As a guide!
Hey the only reason I asked this was to get a guide of the levels, personally I don't care what my level is! I'm just happy to share my feelings on sites that I encounter...
--
Scott Evans VK7HSE
http://www.vk7hse.hobby-site.org
PGP/GPG Key ID 437E00F9 -
- on Sun 04 Apr 2010
- 11:17:04 PM UTC
Really True :)) ----- MF
Really True :))
-----
MF IT-UESC - Protecting your Digital Experience. Now. -
- on Sun 17 Jan 2010
- 06:10:06 PM UTC
Levels are important because
Levels are important because WOT has made them so.
With increased level your rating carry more weight.
I can't imagine anybody that would not truly desire their opinion be trusted and mean more.
Levels show your commitment to make WOT work.
WOT recognizes levels by awarding those who achieve higher ranks with special privileges.( e.g. mass rating tool)
Although this should not be the reason for participating, it is human nature to want validation of ones efforts.
Heidi_____________________________________________________
.......Beyond all lies, the truth awaits to give accurate knowledge...... -
- on Sun 17 Jan 2010
- 07:21:41 PM UTC
re: Levels are important because
With increased level your rating carry more weight.
Not true.
The "levels" being discussed are Activity scores
What carries your "weight" is your reliability which is defined over time as your ratings are measured against and compared to others who've rated the same sites. This is how WOT learns to trust you.Activity scores merely suggest a member grouping like how forums (BBS) use PIP's
The diference being, on a forum you hit x-quantity, you move "up," and when you add another x-quantity; you move "up" again, whereas in WOT the quantities are based on a logarithmic scale, so it's harder to "climb up."As a Platinum member, that doesn't mean my rating reliability is any higher than yours, in fact it's most likely the opposite. I have rated a large quantity of websites, so I have a higher chance of not conforming to how others have rated the same sites, which can decrease WOT's overall trust in my ratings.
-------
WOT Services Ltd. - gives us safety through Web of Trust.
WOT Community - gives us security through unity.
Thank you all
- G7W -
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 09:53:25 AM UTC
Re: I would
No, it would be a major flaw in the system if one could become trusted by only being very active (read: by spamming). User levels have nothing to do with how reliable a user's ratings are considered and therefore, it's certainly possible for a silver level member to have more influence than a platinum level member.
-
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 11:11:45 AM UTC
Re: Re: I would
So, like g7w says ("As a Platinum member, that doesn't mean my rating reliability is any higher than yours, in fact it's most likely the opposite"), someone who rates perfectly fairly at platinum level is at a natural disadvantage to someone who rates perfectly fairly at silver level (with regards to reliability rating)?
Doesn't really make sense considering
1) The more you rate, the better you get at it
2) The more established and security-savvy users like g7w seem to have the highest activity scores
3) It would sort of defeat the purpose of users wanting to rate anyway -
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 11:28:17 AM UTC
Re: Re: Re: I would
1. I don´t want to attack so. personally, so idon´t name anyone, but believe me, that´s not right!!
2. Score has nothing to do with reliabilityBlueberrycake Level Member of the WOT Community
-
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 03:50:45 PM UTC
re: in fact it's most likely the opposite
I am not a WOT Developer, just a user as are most on this Forum.
The following statement are my interpretation of "how" WOT works, and with having no background in statistical analysis... this may all be gibberish.My reference to in fact it's most likely the opposite
is from the fact that as one moves up through the activity score ranges, it becomes harder to get higher from the logarithmic nature of activity score calculations.It would seem logical that reliability scores are calculated in somewhat the same way, using different factors to achieve WOT's trust in you.
Why would the factors that cause WOT to distrust you behave any differently?
If it requires "more" to get "higher" in activity levels, then it probably would take "more" to increase WOT's trust in you to increase your reliability.
Conversely, it would take less mistakes for WOT to display some distrust in you, effecting your overall trust by lowering your reliability.
So as you move "higher" in your reliability, it costs "more" for mistakes that may flag WOT to show "distrust."
I have, and I will, make "mistakes." No one person is "perfect" so I hope no one could achieve a reliability factor of 1 (100%); it must always be below 1; more likely a cut-off point has been assigned factoring in the chance for [computer] WOT's errors as well (no system is perfect either) so including say a plus/minus of 0.02 the highest anyone could obtain would be 0.98 (98%)
I would assume there are two forms of "mistakes" in WOT:
(1) intent - purposely rating against the normality (ie; spam) and
(2) negligence - actual human error which could be caused by misunderstanding, difference of opinion, or by flagging a good site red from actual compromise, but not reviewing the site later on and remove your warning comment/rating.Without looking at profiles and using actual comparisons, I'll state some simple numbers to get this point across:
What this all boils down to is that you may be penalized "1" for each mistake, where I may be penalized "2" and since I have 10 times more ratings than you (activity) and we both have the same ratio of "correctness" ( we both achieved 98% reliability) I result with a lower overall reliability because my mistakes cost me more:
You made 10 mistakes starting at 98% - (0.1 *1) = 97%
I made 10 mistakes starting at 98% - (0.1 *2) - 96%
So WOT trusts you more than me.------
WOT Services Ltd. - gives us safety through Web of Trust.
WOT Community - gives us security through unity.
Thank you all
- G7W -
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 03:57:36 PM UTC
Puts on the boxing glove and
Puts on the boxing gloves and spars my good dear friend.
But first a hug... (and a sucker punch between the legs)
I understand what you are saying in whole and such should work properly, yet it can be flawed.
They (WOT) are putting the emphasis on levels.
If I achieved Platinum level yet all my rating where just garbage, yet now get the the pleasure of the mass rating tool because WOT rewards activity over merit/reliability.
This would just mean I am now allowed to screw up more efficiently.
Ding Ding
Round #2
and in this corner ...._____________________________________________________
.......Beyond all lies, the truth awaits to give accurate knowledge...... -
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 05:16:49 PM UTC
preparedness
I always wear a cup when sparring., but the hug was nice, thank you. :-)
-
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 03:37:10 PM UTC
The you have another flaw
Then you have another flaw Sami... and contradicting yourself.
Giving someone that has a lower merit value use of Mass Rating!
So it should not be given to a member just because they have reached that level.
When a silver member may be more accurately rating sites.
Again I still think a merit value should be listed on profiles!_____________________________________________________
.......Beyond all lies, the truth awaits to give accurate knowledge...... -
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 04:34:37 PM UTC
Re: Levels are important because
Ok, let me end the speculation... :)
- User levels don't affect your estimated reliability and platinum level users don't have a disadvantage compared to others.
- The algorithm uses many factors to estimate rating reliability and generally speaking, it's way more complicated than what's been speculated here.
- The reliability estimates aren't public to make gaming the system more difficult and to encourage everyone to rate honestly. Also, even though the estimates are automated and perfectly objective, I'm sure some users would take them personally and publishing them would create all kinds of unwanted friction in the community. I don't think anyone wants that.
- The mass rating tool isn't awarded to users based on merit. It's given out as a reward to active users.
Was there anything else?
-
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 05:19:03 PM UTC
Yep... but I'll have to get
Yep... but I'll have to get back to you. (sticks tongue Out)
Nice explanation._____________________________________________________
-
- on Tue 19 Jan 2010
- 03:58:33 PM UTC
re: Ok, let me end the speculation
We need an entry in the Wiki for "Rating Reliability"
I would attempt to write this, but I probably would be incorrect with what I say.
It shouldn't need much, so wouldn't take much time, and should be done by either you or Timo.This would be a quick solution for when this topic reappears - as it will - by simply having a link to reply with that hopefully resolves the question.
-
- on Tue 19 Jan 2010
- 05:04:05 PM UTC
Why didn't you just say
Why didn't you just say that... LOL
So now that I made Gold today... It still may be tarnished. ~frowns~
I love WOT.________________________________________________________________
I'm a Verified and Certified "Pain in the Butt" and you haven't seen the last of me! -
- on Mon 18 Jan 2010
- 12:10:02 PM UTC
Re: Re: Re: Re:I would
You can orientate on the points of the rater, but its now 100% percent guarantee that he isnt making an Error. Even g7w can make Errors, so just make your own opinion.
__________________________________________________________________
Gold-Member of WOT-Community
An individuals rating (rookie, Bronze, Silver, Gold & Platnium)
I've had a quick look under the Support & FAQ but unless I'm completely blind (semi am in my right eye!) I didn't see just what the criteria is for each level. Are they based on the amount of websites you rate + comments or just individual rates for both?
So like rate 50 sites you get Bronze, 250 sites you get silver and so on...
Or is this info secret squirrel :-)