At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
If you hover over it, it'll say your points, then after Share and Tweet, it'll say What Is SmartScore? click on that. It'll explain all about it.
Thanks for your replay. Could you explain the criteria for scoring marks in teamwork, problem solving, engagement.
Teamwork is how well you work with others - like in a situation where there are many users in a single question. Problem solving is how often you are able answer and answer well. Engagement is your activity, the breadth and depth of your usage of OpenStudy.
Thanks. Your smart score is 69 (63,62,64) what does 69 indicates? How system is calculating? I strongly believe that to play the game we have to know the rules. Could you please explain in detail what is criteria system is using to give the score
There's a more detailed breakdown on your profile, which you can reach by clicking your username at the very top of the page.
it a bs and unaccurate score
A claim I'm sure you will back up with actual arguments at some point.
I have backed them up countles time. It is actually less to do with academics and being smart and more to do with being a cheater and or popular.
No, you've made those accusations, which have been refuted to the extent you've made them. Mostly you've focused on the metrics that are not particularly heavily weighted and ignored the effect of moderator action on cheating-like behavior. You've also ignored the quality of top users (every high-SmartScore user is an excellent and exemplary helper). In effect, you've decided that SmartScore is inaccurate and then tried to fit the facts to that point of view, instead of looking at its actual output and realizing that in the vast majority of cases it is a very good measurement. We can't promise perfection, but we can say we're reasonably satisfied with its accuracy right now. We experimented with our database of people's actions a good bit before settling on the current formula for SmartScore, and made sure that good users would be rewarded properly, relying on a combination of proper weighting and moderator vigilance, along with users reporting abuse, to keep the score accurate. If you have specific concerns—i.e., users you don't think deserve their rank, particularly once you've taken the score's categories into account—feel free to email us at abuse@openstudy and we'll look into whether there's merit to your concerns and how we can adjust our strategies accordingly.
Good shadowfiend. But my suggestion is Game rules are to be known to the players. For example in t 20 cricket the chasing team batsmen has to know current score, targeted score so that they can play accordingly. Similarly here also you have to disclose criteria to score in different categories like teamwork, problem solving, engagement
Our view on SmartScore is fairly straightforward: if you behave within the code of conduct and help others, your score should grow. We've chosen to keep some of the details of the score under wraps precisely because we don't want people to game the system, we want them to behave correctly. There are those who game the system anyway (e.g., by giving themselves medals with alternate accounts), and we have a process to find and punish those people.
LOL you just went on a rant about me not knowing the system then just refuse to show me the system. All i know is when you hover over your score there is a team work one. WHich is nothing to do with teamwork it is all about popularity and inviting people(spam)
“No, you've made those accusations, which have been refuted to the extent you've made them.” Meaning, we have addressed your concerns regarding the inaccuracies of the system by informing you about the ways that the system reduces the impact of, for example, popularity, to the extent that we consider it to be something we need to reduce the impact of. Given incomplete information about the internals of a system, the way to judge it is by its external effects. While you keep leveling accusations about the scores being related to popularity and spam, you do not provide evidence to back up your claims in the form of people who you consider should not have a certain score but do. That is what I have asked you for. If you intend to continue not providing such evidence, I will have to ask you to stop making your accusations. On a related note, in your mind, are social interactions not a part of teamwork? Is the best team one that has no communication? There is a reason that successful team leaders are typically outgoing. To the extent that “popularity” reflects communication, yes, the teamwork subscore of SmartScore takes into account “popularity”. You have similarly failed to explain why it shouldn't in this context.
the best rocketry team is the best one that talks about rockets and physics, the best computing team is the best that talks about networks, IDK what kind of team talks about music and non academic stuff but that is what i feel like in OS. I guess i wont have an high SS :P
It's an unofficial survey of course, but I went through about 10 of the latest users in Music chat. All of them have lower overall SmartScores *and* teamwork scores than you do ;) I'm just saying it's possible some qualitative sense you have of the site is affecting your view of how effective SmartScore is. I think if you undertook a quantitative survey (as we have before), you'd find the scores are actually reasonably (though of course not completely) accurate and generally well-behaved. We of course strive to improve that accuracy over time, but to do that we need people who have issues with the score to give us specific examples where it's not working, so that we can figure out what the best way to deal with those outliers is. And it's been my experience in the so-called real world that the best teams are the ones that talk about *both* work stuff *and* other things. It forms a stronger bond that helps those teams work together better. Just ask @darthsid, @mattfeury, @farmdawgnation, @cshalvey, @chris, @preetha, and the other members of the OpenStudy team if all we ever talk about is OpenStudy :) That said, there's an interesting nugget in there about weighting chat in the subject that you're helping with more heavily… Not something we'll be doing immediately, but something worth simulating to see how it affects everyone's scores and if it does so positively.
LOL all your buddies and mods :P I am not askin anything to any of them.
Well, yes, since they all either currently work or have worked in the past at OpenStudy they're all mods. Not sure why that would mean you can't ask them anything. As with myself, they are all people, and as far as I know you haven't received any negative action for criticizing OpenStudy from any moderators, nor should you.