Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Should we change the current "shares for posting" rewards as proposed?

Poll ended at Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:05 pm

Yes, change to the proposed system
12
36%
No, leave it as it is
21
64%
 
Total votes: 33

richard@imutual
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:19 am
Sharing: 3stars.png
Has thanked: 1751 times
Been thanked: 3462 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by richard@imutual » Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:11 pm

Well, there seem to be mixed opinions on this, roughly divided into three groups:

- Keep things as they are
- Try the proposed system
- Don't reward posts with shares at all

To get a better gauge of views, I've created a poll around the first two options. For those who fall into option three, I would say that option two represents a sensible compromise, with the shares offered being significantly reduced. Whichever of options one or two we go with, we can always have a later vote (perhaps after a further trial period) on dropping shares-for-posts rewards altogether.

Vote by 31 Jan please!

richard@imutual
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:19 am
Sharing: 3stars.png
Has thanked: 1751 times
Been thanked: 3462 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by richard@imutual » Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:24 pm

jimthehorsegod wrote:1 -the 2nd 'best' post of the month gets a reward disproportionately lower than one post with one thanks. Seems grossly unfair and removes entirely the incentive
I'm not sure I follow you. This seems to be mixing up 'posts of the month' with 'shares for best posters' :? If you are suggesting that we alter the rewards for POTM, I'm always open to suggestions
jimthehorsegod wrote:2 - Abuse of the system by reciprocal thanking would be trivial to detect, why not just do that?
If we can agree on a simple system that wouldn't be time-consuming to adminster, I'm all ears. Is it that simple though? Just because two posters thank each other, that wouldn't necessarily constitute abuse of the system. It could be perfectly genuine and warranted.

richard@imutual
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:19 am
Sharing: 3stars.png
Has thanked: 1751 times
Been thanked: 3462 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by richard@imutual » Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:46 pm

Some figures to help put the current and proposed schemes in context:

During December, members earned a total of 142,076 shares. The percentage of these shares that were earned for posting was 0.84% (1188).

If we had operated the proposed system, the number of shares awarded for posting would have been reduced from 1188 to 394 (0.28%)

To answer this question:
What value do you place on increased activity in the forums and will this offset the effect of devaluing individual shares?
I'd say that the forum activity is worth at least 0.28% of the shares we issue. Especially when you consider that it can help attract members and motivate them to generate transactions/revenue.

uglysteve
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 5:20 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 64 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by uglysteve » Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:08 pm

richard@imutual wrote:
jimthehorsegod wrote:1 -the 2nd 'best' post of the month gets a reward disproportionately lower than one post with one thanks. Seems grossly unfair and removes entirely the incentive
I'm not sure I follow you. This seems to be mixing up 'posts of the month' with 'shares for best posters' :? If you are suggesting that we alter the rewards for POTM, I'm always open to suggestions
What I mean is that if we accept that rewarding posts is the way to drive up posting (separate discussion!) and as per your original statement:
richard@imutual wrote:To encourage members to post multiple quality posts, rather than relying on a single 'blockbuster' (already recognised in POTM)
Then by having 1x 'blockbuster' reward, for POTM at one end of the scale, and 1x share max reward for any other thanked post, you're not differentiating between a post thanked once, and a post thanks ten thousand times, if there's another one that month thanked ten thousand and one times (exaggeration to emphasise point) that wins POTM.

Again, if you believe that incentivising posting is the way to go then don't you have to create a fairer link between quality of post (measured presently by number of thanks) and size of reward?

richard@imutual
Posts: 4248
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:19 am
Sharing: 3stars.png
Has thanked: 1751 times
Been thanked: 3462 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by richard@imutual » Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:37 pm

Ok, I understand your point. Thanks for the clarification :thumbup:

I don't think there's any one perfect system, as you have to strike a balance between simplicity (both for members to understand and us to calculate/administer!) and fairness. If we didn't apply the "unique thanked posts" element of the proposal, I think we end up rewarding the same posts twice. I'm especially thinking about the 'reply here to enter' comps which certainly deserve to figure strongly in POTM but should perhaps not get rewarded a second time through this method

I assume you're aware that there are actually prizes for the top three posts in POTM? And we could increase the amount/number of prizes if members feel that would fairly offset the "unique thankers/thanked posts" nature of this proposal

What do other members think about this particular point?

Oggy
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 7:28 pm
Has thanked: 343 times
Been thanked: 307 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by Oggy » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:46 pm

kevinchess1 wrote:Not reely fair on posters like luke and oggy who never get thank though isit :o
:lol:
Thanked by: kevinchess1

superman
Posts: 7377
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:07 pm
Has thanked: 269 times
Been thanked: 354 times

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by superman » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:08 pm

Everyone please vote. This is our first real test of being a "mutual".

Sarah
Posts: 2628
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 10:01 am
Has thanked: 200 times
Been thanked: 1790 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by Sarah » Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:04 pm

I'd prefer the process of awarding shares for posts to be stopped altogether (preferably with already awarded ones cancelled). There does seem to be a lot of low quality posts in the forum and knowing that they're diluting my shareholding makes me less inclined to use imutual as a cashback site.
Thanked by: moi, Bruce

cccashbacklover
Posts: 1664
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 9:55 pm
Has thanked: 1046 times
Been thanked: 1102 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by cccashbacklover » Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:20 pm

Sarah wrote:I'd prefer the process of awarding shares for posts to be stopped altogether (preferably with already awarded ones cancelled). There does seem to be a lot of low quality posts in the forum and knowing that they're diluting my shareholding makes me less inclined to use imutual as a cashback site.
Totally agree with you :thumbup:
Thanked by: moi
There are those who agree with and those who are convinced to agree with and I fall into neither of those categories ....

collateral
Posts: 282
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:32 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 77 times
Contact:

Re: Proposed change to "shares for posting"

Post by collateral » Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:21 pm

I`m in the dont reward posts at all camp where can I register my vote?

There are only 2 options.
Thanked by: moi

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests