Themabewertung:
  • 5 Bewertung(en) - 5 im Durchschnitt
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Drawing attention to a specific user and their detrimental behaviour
#8
There are several issues combined here.

The mere existence of solving videos might be contributing to this problem. If a puzzle author publishes a solving video for one of their puzzles, anyone who watches that video, whether they have solved the puzzle on their own or not, can enter the solution code in the portal; there is no way to prevent that. Puzzle authors who are unhappy with that possibility should refrain from making such videos. For this reason (and others), in my opinion solving videos for puzzles created by someone else should be made only with the consent of the puzzle author. Note: I am not familiar with the legal situation in this matter.

If any puzzle portal user decides to use external help for solving puzzles (solving videos, computer assistance, team solving etc.), they are entirely allowed to do so. This is not considered cheating; the puzzle portal is not competitive (or at least it is not supposed to be). Boosting their stats, as it has been called, is not a violation of portal rules.

A more serious issue might be the rating system. Generally anyone who solved a puzzle is allowed to rate a puzzle. Since beauty (as well as difficulty) is in the eye of the beholder, there is no objectively correct rating; if someone honestly dislikes a puzzle, they are free to rate it accordingly. Solvers who rate every puzzle as very bad though can be considered abusing the system (there is no way they do indeed dislike all puzzles that much and keep coming to the portal); we have yet to discuss how to handle the situation.

However there are other issues about the rating system. From recent forum posts and private messages it appears that many puzzle authors treat the rating system as more competitive as it was intended. A puzzle with a rating below some threshold is considered a failure; I remember at least one author who was unhappy with a rating below 95%. Some authors even went as far as deleting their own puzzles in such a case. If this becomes the norm, any rating that is not very good might become some sort of deviation, and solvers might feel obliged to rate a puzzle as very good even if they do not perceive it that way. Note that even a 75% puzzle is considered "good" on average.

The missing anonymity has been discussed before; if you are dedicated enough, you can find out how any individual solver rates your puzzles. This is not intended, unfortunately we do not have any solution to this problem that doesn't have other flaws.

Finally, it has been suggested that puzzle authors create more and more complex and difficult puzzles just to avoid solves by a certain individual. I seriously doubt that; the trend to complex and difficult puzzles started a very long time ago.
Zitieren


Nachrichten in diesem Thema
RE: Drawing attention to a specific user and their detrimental behaviour - von uvo - 07.10.2022, 13:50

Möglicherweise verwandte Themen...
Thema Verfasser Antworten Ansichten Letzter Beitrag
  Personalized User Experience Hausigel 26 10.356 13.03.2022, 11:50
Letzter Beitrag: Dandelo
  Benutzer/user mit & RoBau 0 2.056 07.06.2020, 13:11
Letzter Beitrag: RoBau

Gehe zu:


Benutzer, die gerade dieses Thema anschauen: 1 Gast/Gäste