🕸📝Fergus Duniho wrote on Sat, Oct 21, 2023 04:17 PM UTC:
I'm now caught up on this discussion. I would propose having the script calculate two scores. One would be the raw score it calculates now, and the other would be an attenuated score that factors in how many games someone has marked as a favorite game. The formula I propose using for determining the value of someone's vote in calculating the attenuated score is this: min(1, 60/(n+50)) where n is the number of games someone has favorited. This will create fractional scores, which I'm not bothered with, as this would be a supplement to and not a replacement of the raw score. The page would then give two options for sorting the list. Since there is a difference of 10 between 60 and 50, this would allow someone to favorite up to ten games without any attenuation of his vote in the attenuated score. After ten votes, his votes would slowly reduce in value. At 70 votes, each vote would be worth only one half a vote. At 130, each would be worth one third. At 190, each would be worth a quarter. Continuing to add 60 more votes, 250 would be worth one fifth, 310 one sixth, etc. If we decide we want the value of votes to attenuate at a slower or faster rate, we could use different values than 60 and 50.
I'm now caught up on this discussion. I would propose having the script calculate two scores. One would be the raw score it calculates now, and the other would be an attenuated score that factors in how many games someone has marked as a favorite game. The formula I propose using for determining the value of someone's vote in calculating the attenuated score is this: min(1, 60/(n+50)) where n is the number of games someone has favorited. This will create fractional scores, which I'm not bothered with, as this would be a supplement to and not a replacement of the raw score. The page would then give two options for sorting the list. Since there is a difference of 10 between 60 and 50, this would allow someone to favorite up to ten games without any attenuation of his vote in the attenuated score. After ten votes, his votes would slowly reduce in value. At 70 votes, each vote would be worth only one half a vote. At 130, each would be worth one third. At 190, each would be worth a quarter. Continuing to add 60 more votes, 250 would be worth one fifth, 310 one sixth, etc. If we decide we want the value of votes to attenuate at a slower or faster rate, we could use different values than 60 and 50.