-- Posted by ToyJetpack at 7:21 pm on July 4, 2009 I don't know where else to put this, but if it is unwanted, feel free to delete it. Anyway, in my opinion the supportiveness response is flawed, because it favors those that tell people what they want to hear. For instance, I've seen Springs give really sensible advice on multiple occasions, but often times it isn't what the person who needed the assistance has wanted to hear. My take on the subject may be uninformed though, as I am new. -- Posted by The Mixed Tape at 7:24 pm on July 4, 2009 The supportiveness system is flawed in so many ways, more than just this. People can create long, detailed responses and the eHelp poster can get annoyed/not feel like reading, and just rate poorly. I know from experience that I've accidentally clicked the wrong button when I went to rate a response to one of my eHelps. :/ -- Posted by cherryD at 7:25 pm on July 4, 2009 We realized that. =) -- Posted by Monroe at 7:26 pm on July 4, 2009 Quote: from The Academy at 9:24 pm on July 4, 2009 The supportiveness system is flawed in so many ways, more than just this. People can create long, detailed responses and the eHelp poster can get annoyed/not feel like reading, and just rate poorly. I know from experience that I've accidentally clicked the wrong button when I went to rate a response to one of my eHelps. :/ This is what I was saying the other day. (: It's so true. The OP may not like what the SL has to stay, or it may not be what the person wants to hear, and they give low ratings. -- Posted by ToyJetpack at 7:28 pm on July 4, 2009 Quote: from cherryD at 10:25 pm on July 4, 2009 We realized that. =) I'm sorry, I realize you guys would be far more accustomed to any problems in the system, I guess my point was that you are not the only ones who realize that these are problems. -- Posted by ehmusic at 7:31 pm on July 4, 2009 Why can't there be new positions opened for certain people to rate them, or other SL's? -- Posted by SpRiNgS at 7:37 pm on July 4, 2009 are you STALKIN ME? but yeah it's been talked about. I don't let it bug me personally I just do my best you know? -- Posted by ToyJetpack at 7:42 pm on July 4, 2009 Quote: from SpRiNgS at 10:37 pm on July 4, 2009 are you STALKIN ME? but yeah it's been talked about. I don't let it bug me personally I just do my best you know? Haha, no no. On the rare occasions that I try to help, I notice you around some good percent of the time. It's good that it doesn't bug you. -- Posted by SpRiNgS at 7:43 pm on July 4, 2009 Quote: from ToyJetpack at 7:42 pm on July 4, 2009 Quote: from SpRiNgS at 10:37 pm on July 4, 2009 are you STALKIN ME?    but yeah it's been talked about. I don't let it bug me personally    I just do my best you know? Haha, no no. On the rare occasions that I try to help, I notice you around some good percent of the time. It's good that it doesn't bug you. oh ok but yeah it's never a big deal just try to help the person the best you can -- Posted by cherryD at 7:44 pm on July 4, 2009 Quote: from ToyJetpack at 10:28 am on July 5, 2009 Quote: from cherryD at 10:25 pm on July 4, 2009 We realized that. =) I'm sorry, I realize you guys would be far more accustomed to any problems in the system, I guess my point was that you are not the only ones who realize that these are problems.  it's good that you say this instead of telling us we suck and we don't tell people what they wanna hear. -- Posted by hI jAMES at 8:07 pm on July 4, 2009 Yep, that's true. And we realize it. When a SL writes a long reply that took him/her a good amount of time, it hurts that much more.  But some SLs just don't care about the rating system. What truly matters is helping that person and they can rate it however they want. Some people are going to rate SLs bad in spite. Some people just aren't going to care. To be honest, this is what makes a good SL. If a SL can continue to support people even though they know some people are going to kill their rating, it shows they have character. Those are the keepers. -- Posted by hithere at 11:42 pm on July 4, 2009 if you mean that "it's flawed" for the reason that you actually gave, that's bullshit. you almost certainly have no evidence that it is flawed in that manner; i think you just assume it is flawed in that manner because you project your hypothetical self onto raters and assume that they do what you would do. you have no way to know why anybody gives a certain rating. so maybe you mean something else. if you mean that "it's flawed" in the sense that "supportiveness" doesn't truly rate how "supportive" a member is, then DUH, it's flawed, because there are no established objective standards for "supportive", and your opinion of "supportive" will often differ from the opinion that a rater has. since "supportiveness" doesn't necessarily ever have an effect on anybody, it's just a statistic that has no meaning except that which you personally assign to it. thus there's no reason to complain about it, because you're only complaining about your own perspective itself. -- Posted by Bud2400 at 11:57 pm on July 4, 2009 I actually think the supportiveness rating is flawed as well.  It's flawed mainly in the fact that by its very nature it is not consistent.  You do not have the same people rating one's supportiveness.  Instead, you have many different individuals doing that, all with their own criteria and all with their own standards.  Some people are easier to get a full 4 from than others.  Some people are simply unreasonable in how they rate and you'd be lucky to get above a 2 out of them.  And others, like the OP mentions, doesn't want to hear some things even if the support leader in question is of the opinion that what they don't want to hear is the right thing in the end. As such, the supportiveness rating isn't a great measure to rate how effective a support leader is, even if it may correlate with it a bit.  Does that make it worthless?  In my opinion, yes, although I believe the individual ratings themselves can be quite useful (barring some exceptions obviously).  But people do seem to have a fixation with numbers, even with something as subjective as supportiveness, hence its existence.  I'd simply advise to not get worked up over it - just focus on what you think makes your eHelp responses good, improving however you can as you go along.  It's really the written response which is what matters - not any useless number based on someone's subjective opinion. -- Posted by dreamweaver at 12:35 pm on July 5, 2009 It's true... it's very flawed. If we can come up with a better system and then present it to David, then he may consider it over his current settings. Otherwise, Currently, I have been telling SLs to NOT pay much attention to their ratings and just focus on doing their best. If the modteam feels their responses are out of line or not up to par, we will PM you and explain what's up and how to improve. -- Posted by Charolastra at 11:39 pm on July 5, 2009 I once made a post that was an unfavorable opinion to the eHelp poster, even though it was the support they probably needed and the support a professional would probably give them. I was downrated severely, but oh well, you move on knowing that whatever you wrote must have affected them in some way. But if they think about it and eventually end up doing what I say anyway, I would be 100% willing to accept a negative rating because I'd pride myself on the fact that it ultimately lead to a positive outcome.. -- Posted by 420trendz at 11:37 am on July 6, 2009 This is the big reason why I say to hell with the ratings..