Should the Grading System be Modified?

[BlacKitten]

For the sake of not losing a fellow Staff member, I want people's thoughts?

Currently, the Formulas of those who get a Bonus of 3 and 4 are:

E(x) = 8x
E(x) = 9x

E(x) = Your Overall Exp
x = number of posts you made.

---

Suppose 10 posts were made in a thread. The difference of exp is only 10. For those who write well and those who write mediocre, 10 exp ain't much of a difference, and the MAIN problem is that it may discourages people to write well?

Another potential issue: Between those who 'almost' could get a 4, and those who 'barely' made it to 3, they still get the same Bonus. 

---

Let's list what gradings say without mentioning names just be glancing some threads (NONE OF THESE ARE MINE!:

• Two people got a Bonus 4, and the downsides were spelling errors. (To what extent should spelling error play a role in point deduction?)
• One person got a Bonus of 4, and the downside was that the thread was incomplete. (What if your partner went inactive, and your writing was awesome?)
• A common Bad was that one should ideally match the length of the post with your partner. (Very often, they say: It's quality, not quantity)

Ignoring the grade, should these downsides justify point deduction? 

Should there be a very loose, rule of thumb, rubric? 

Should it be changed at all? 

---

P.S I am not saying anything is wrong! Please don't hate me, just jotting down what I hear from people. So most of these arguments are not mine. I personally do not mind this system! I just don't want someone to hate this site and leave. 

[EriChar]

Thanks for posting this up in light of my own frustrations Maru. It's not that I think the overall system of points is bad, I just feel it isn't being used to the design it was built for.

Honestly, I think people who should be getting scored lower are 'over-graded' because A) There's no real definition of what people should strive to be, and B) I don't think the grading staff want the headache of people rejecting their scores.

Conversely, I think a lot of the time people can miss out on a five because there's this ingrained belief that it represents 'perfection'; i.e, not a single error in the writing.

I also see these 'half scores' like 3.5 and such being handed out, and ask myself why? The whole point of the bonus is that it's a slowly increasing level of effort and quality, and each score should have the barest minimum of increase between them. I don't see the need for a half score since something should either be one or the other; I feel that's just a grader being soft on the person and not wanting them to feel bad that they didn't make the score above. Nothing to do with quality.

Since the current 0-5 scale (yup, it's Zero to five, not 1-5, or 3-4 as it mostly seems to get graded) had a lot of my own input, I think it should be pointed out that a score of five was never meant to represent perfection, just damn good RP. Here's what I would view as the scores and a brief description when I asked for the system to be changed from the previous capped bonus scheme.

Five ~ The bee's knees; great RP with only minor errors if any.

Four ~ Very Good RP; perhaps a few minor issues but nothing to get worked up over, or something big that has maybe detracted from the story.

Three ~ Good RP; the elements are there to make stories great, but perhaps there's wasted potential in places and some things don't quite work.

Two ~ Average RP; About where you would say the 'average' writer would be; the story is good, but perhaps far fetched, but you're working hard and have plenty of room to go.

One ~ Below Average RP; I can see what you tried to do there, but it didn't quite pull off. You're here, making the effort, but there's a lot wrong with this and so you should be start focusing on what you're critiqued on if you wanna get better.

Zero ~ Bad RP; pretty much, you're throwing the bare minimum out there and not only making your own RP look bad, but also making everyone else suffer for it.

Ya see, these are the kinds of things I had in mind. When the system was devised, getting ANY sort of bonus was to be considered a reflection of the work; ones and twos were there to say "Hey, keep at it, and you'll get there." not be ignored and hand everyone a 'good'.

I see the critiques that graders write and it seems like people are getting a wall of criticisms, then scoring a three. That doesn't add up with how I intended this system to be used, and I think this needs addressing before more people like myself become disgruntled at the lack thereof of distinction between scores. I'm not here complaining that people write badly are getting overgraded, rather that it feels to me like there's such a little difference between 'average' and 'great' RP being earned, there's no incentive to go that extra mile. If all it's going to be is like, threads taking an extra month and earning a gigantic ten extra Exp as Maru pointed out, what's the point of the system? Might as well go back to a flat rate per post for all the good it does.

I'm hoping this rebellion will do some good, but to be honest, when I see stuff like this I just wanna leave and go to a site without these systems because they serve no use here as is.

[Mirra|Robin]

I think that getting this worked up over numbers is silly. Threatening to leave over it is like threatening to take a break for the site because you chipped a nail typing a post. Since when did this site become about the numbers? I see them as a progress report rather than a 'more numbers makes you better' kind of thing like many other sites have. I have no problem getting rid of the bonus system nor do I have a problem with keeping it. However, I would like to keep it so people get a little something more for events rather than just a baseline of exp. Otherwise, why do the events? Just something to think about.

[Kurosaki]

Char, I'm not sure why this wasn't just brought up peacefully in the staff board, as it's a legitimate concern and I'm sure Aubs would appreciate the need for a real outline for what deserves which grade to make it easier on his graders. Also, yeah, no one should be getting a .5 or anything. It's whole numbers 0-5 for bonuses. =/ So not sure who's been doing that? But at any rate, 5's should definitely be obtainable even with spelling errors. The whole point in us switching how bonuses were done was so that there was no "perfect only" for the top score. It was obtainable if you did a really bang up job. Unlike when Flame was our head for the Ministry of RP.

Btw, Maru, to touch on one of the points you made, members can complete their own threads via the double posting rule that we have for threads where you need to bail yourself out. So, yes, a thread that's not complete SHOULD be graded down because the member didn't take the chance to finish up the plot.

And yes, very bad threads SHOULD be getting 0 bonuses. I'd like to hear Aub's input on the rubric you made and to have that posted in the "how to grade" area here: strawhatforum.proboards.com/thread/18048/grader-updated