new suggestion for scoring

[mohrm]

Why not

• give more points for contributions to bigger stories (more parts, more participants)
• punish leaving a story

This would make point-farming harder and promote stories with more people involved, but not too many...

[qznc]

Rate how quickly one responds. E.g. "median response time of last 10 sentences".

• Median means a few outlier do not affect your score
• Last 10 means your score ignores your long ago past and you can quickly recover from a bad score

On your ideas:

• Why are stories with many participants good? To encourage mixing?
• Why punish leaving? It does not hurt the others. If you have no time to participate leaving is better than stalling it for others.

[ratefuchs]

Giving more points to stories with more participants both means

• it slightly balances the bigger delay (bigger stories mean less sentences for one specific user per time interval)
• thus, it is also harder to farm points by just having a two-user story with heavy activity, compared to participating in bigger stories
• bigger stories are more fun because the context can be lost more easily (if it is your turn again for a three user story, the story has not that much evolved from your last statement, and you could get it back on your track much more easily)

Punishing users for leaving is not that good of an idea, especially if they can be invited against their will (as of now). You should rather punish users who stall instead of leaving. This can be achieved using qznc's suggestion.

[qznc]

bigger stories are more fun because the context can be lost more easily

That is subjective. I like stories that stay consistent.

Farming points in general is inherently bad. You want to steer people to do certain things. So, the good questions are: "What user behavior do you want to see?" and "How to we encourage users to do it?"

[mohrm]

Punishing users for leaving is not that good of an idea, especially if they can be invited against their will (as of now). You should rather punish users who stall instead of leaving. This can be achieved using qznc's suggestion.

Yeah, you're right. So, forget the punishment for leaving.

[qznc]

Now we have Leseempfehlungen, which we could use for scoring.

[mohrm]

Now we have Leseempfehlungen, which we could use for scoring.

But these are only story-wide, not part-wise. So they would have to apply to all authors. If we could also like individual parts, this could contribute to a score. I also found the idea with the mean response time not bad.

Maybe a combination of the two?

To state it with the philosophy of @qznc: I want my users to often contribute funny story parts.

[nomeata]

Scoring individual sentences effectively breaks the anonymisation, if the user can observe the score changes when he likes a sentence. So if one cares about that (I do not) one has to be careful here.

[qznc]

I want my users to often contribute funny story parts

So we can derive two sub goals:

1. Identify which parts are funny. Unless we use fancy AI techniques, voting is the only solution? It needs to be per part.
2. Encourage writers to make more of those. A highscore is possibility. Achievements are another. E.g. "Congratulations! You got 5 "funny" votes."

Should funny parts in not-public stories count?