New MESO-Rx member ranking system

[readalot]

The problem with this is that you may be giving / getting really poor advice, potentially dangerous even. At least with public threads, there are opportunities for others to highlight advice as poor or dangerous.

The whole point of the forum after all is to provide a space for public discussion, not a platform for private messaging.

Amen to that.

I should have dedicated these in your honor.

Search results for query: *

thinksteroids.com

Or at least this one:

Grapefruit vs. Hematocrit

Nope. Do you have a link? Just search his posts in instagram. View: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cr3wcgXPe3v/?igsh=ZDE1MWVjZGVmZQ==

thinksteroids.com

Beware the "Gurus"!

Respect.

How To Cap "101"

Do any of you use an anti-caking agent?

thinksteroids.com

 

[PaintDrinker]

The problem with this is that you may be giving / getting really poor advice, potentially dangerous even. At least with public threads, there are opportunities for others to highlight advice as poor or dangerous.

The whole point of the forum after all is to provide a space for public discussion, not a platform for private messaging.

Understood, and I actually like that approach. I’m in no rush. Appreciate the response

 

[Zebedee]

Amen to that.

I should have dedicated these in your honor.

Search results for query: *

thinksteroids.com

Or at least this one:

Grapefruit vs. Hematocrit

Nope. Do you have a link? Just search his posts in instagram. View: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cr3wcgXPe3v/?igsh=ZDE1MWVjZGVmZQ==

thinksteroids.com

Beware the "Gurus"!

Respect.

How To Cap "101"

Do any of you use an anti-caking agent?

thinksteroids.com

I’ve had a long hard day, I’m really tired, my eyes & brain ache & consequently whatever point(s) you’re making to me here is going straight over the top of my head. Explain?

 

[readalot]

I’ve had a long hard day, I’m really tired, my eyes & brain ache & consequently whatever point(s) you’re making to me here is going straight over the top of my head. Explain?

I hope you are feeling better.

You had expressed concern that I was not spending my time on posting quality content and instead wasting it discussing the forum algorithm for trophy administration.

I wanted to reassure you I am doing my best to share high quality posts.

I also was giving you some appreciation for the technical quality in one of your previous posts. Not everyone gives geometric dilution the adoration it deserves.

Take care.

 

[readalot]

@Ghoul broke 11k on reaction score and still stuck at WKM.

Can't find that gif with baby falling over laughing.

#Ghoul_earned_a_color_change

smdh.

 

[MESO-Rx Administrator]

We will probably just eliminate it. It doesn't always accurately reflect contributions towards the harm reduction community.

 

[Ghoul]

@Ghoul broke 11k on reaction score and still stuck at WKM.
#Ghoul_earned_a_color_change

Appreciate the sentiment.

That seems to infer a level of additional responsibility.

I'm enjoying being reckless and giving the "just pin it!" crowd reasons to lose a little sleep

 

[BamaCrazy]

We will probably just eliminate it. It doesn't always accurately reflect contributions towards the harm reduction community.

So true

 

[narta]

We will probably just eliminate it. It doesn't always accurately reflect contributions towards the harm reduction community.

About gd time.

 

[Sampei]

We will probably just eliminate it. It doesn't always accurately reflect contributions towards the harm reduction community.

About time

 

[Jin23]

We will probably just eliminate it. It doesn't always accurately reflect contributions towards the harm reduction community.

A forum like this desperately needs a Functioning ranking system, as the amount of false information spread by even "well known members" is staggering. The system in place now is only partly functional.

Unfortunately I don't see a way around this other then admins giving out some sort of "trusted" badge to certain members, who have proven their knowledge by one way or the other. For instance a forum named shroomery (yes I know), has a good system in place by giving out "trusted cultivator" badges to certain members, and you can be assured those members are more or less correct in their advices.

This is a forum where people talk about administering serious drugs to their systems and thus potentially seriously harming them self's, and yet, we still get a slew of basic, mediocre, down wright wrong advice from members on a day to day basis. I'd wager the majority of advice falls somewhere in this ballpark. And, especially, new members have a hard time distinguishing between false or correct information.

 

[readalot]

"trusted" badge

I am hopeful if they are issued you get one of the first.

I appreciate what you do on here and how serious you take the responsibility to provide accurate information.

1. Do no harm
2. Do good
3. Patient autonomy
4. Healthcare equity

Good read for those interested. Think about these principles in relation to your own (ab)use of AAS.

Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice - PMC

An overview of ethics and clinical ethics is presented in this review. The 4 main ethical principles, that is beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, are defined and explained. Informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality spring ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Ghoul]

I am hopeful if they are issued you get one of the first.

I appreciate what you do on here and how serious you take the responsibility to provide accurate information.

1. Do no harm
2. Do good
3. Patient autonomy
4. Healthcare equity

"Trusted" may be the wrong terminology.

I'm not a mind reader, but I think our host knows the risk of a forum operator seeming to "endorse" medical advice is much more fraught than certifying someone's shroom growing cred.

Probably best to recognize contributing members in some way that doesn't lead anyone to think they're relieved of due diligence and weighing health related advice from online randos, as advice sourced from online randos

 

[readalot]

"Trusted" may be the wrong terminology.

I'm not a mind reader, but I think our host knows the risk of a forum operator seeming to "endorse" medical advice is much more fraught than certifying someone's shroom growing cred.

Probably best to recognize contributing members in some way that doesn't lead anyone to think they're relieved of due diligence and weighing health related advice from online randos, as advice sourced from online randos

Great point. Perhaps "credible" badge instead of "trusted". And of course the first thing any credible member would do is preface any info provided with "see your medical provider", etc.

Absolutely true and 100% agree we are all online randos with zero credentials in the forum medium.

 

[Sampei]

The issue is that any "trusted" member can abuse his position down the line if he wants. it's a complicated balance.

I have never looked at badges or ranks, I have always looked at contents written from a user. That's what should matters in the end.

Funny enough even so meso has thousands of views everyday I feel like it's just a bunch of us around writing. Right now I don't even think we reach 100 members of REAL active user contributing to the forum. I could be mistaken tho.

 

[Ghoul]

This ranking system accurate reflects the gamut of members I think:

 

[Jin23]

The issue is that any "trusted" member can abuse his position down the line if he wants. it's a complicated balance.

I have never looked at badges or ranks, I have always looked at contents written from a user. That's what should matters in the end.

Funny enough even so meso has thousands of views everyday I feel like it's just a bunch of us around writing. Right now I don't even think we reach 100 members of REAL active user contributing to the forum. I could be mistaken tho.

Active members, those outside of source threads, do seem low.

 

[AlexDavis43]

We will probably just eliminate it. It doesn't always accurately reflect contributions towards the harm reduction community.

You got two things:

New members come here and try everything to game the system to get elite status badges, so they can have some sort of perceived authority (seems like a personality type, imo)

And

New members come here and think elite status members got that way because they consistently provide good information, so they follow their advice. Some crazy mfers have 100k followers on twitter

 

[laclark89]

I am hopeful if they are issued you get one of the first.

I appreciate what you do on here and how serious you take the responsibility to provide accurate information.

1. Do no harm
2. Do good
3. Patient autonomy
4. Healthcare equity

Good read for those interested. Think about these principles in relation to your own (ab)use of AAS.

Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice - PMC

An overview of ethics and clinical ethics is presented in this review. The 4 main ethical principles, that is beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, are defined and explained. Informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality spring ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I agree kinda, but some people here think u and ghoul are the damn person? He popped up the second u got demoted for what ever reason? And ur constantly likening and responding to him also? Wtf? And commenting on members status? Take a deep look.


He’s been here what 8 months and deserves to be put above well known members due to him finding a neche in getting thumbs up when others have been here over 20 years lmao ? Clown.

I think I have him blocked due to his posts being only fear mongering.

 

[Rippidy Dippidy]

You're right, of course. No algorithmic ranking system is going to be perfect. It's only a question of how far away from perfect. I'm not going to claim it is anywhere near to perfect. I will only say it is much closer than any other forum ranking system I've seen.

I may have overstated with the following -- "trolls and others who have little to contribute will never leave newbie status" -- at this given point in time. But it is true going forward.

Let me explain. Since the algorithm is a new feature that was applied retroactively, it's calculation were based solely on past forum features/functionality/restrictions/etc. I've recognized some of the past shortcomings. Consequently, modifications have been made to counter these. So, going forward I hope the statement "trolls and others who have little to contribute will never leave newbie status" rings true.

It is incorrect about the role of join date. This is extremely trivial. Of course, it comes into play indirectly - you have to spend some time on the forum to make significant contributions. And all things being equal, those who have been here longer will have made more contributions.

I know what you're saying about the many members with truly valuable contributions who are in still in "rookie" status. They deserve to be recognized, right? I agree. I assure you it is inevitable if they continue on the path.

I think it's best not to "tweak" the criteria to make it easier for them to gain "veteran" status. Especially when you consider your criticism that many "veterans" don't deserve that status. So I need to make the criteria more difficult for them? I can't do both.

This doesn't mean it can't be improved.

Something to keep in mind is that Veteran status is very exclusive with only about 5% of active members. Anything above and beyond that is rare.

79.4% Newbie
15.2% Rookie
5% Veteran
0.36% Elite
0.13% Pro
0.07% Master
0.01% Legendary

Maybe the ratios can be tweaked, I don't know.

I don't necessarily disagree. But then it becomes a political system. And political systems just breed nepotism. I don't want to incentivize ass-kissing.

Why would I delete your comment? It's honest feedback. Constructive criticism is always needed. Going back to my previous point, I'd rather people tell me what they really think than tell me what they think I want to hear because they are afraid of missing out on a ranking award.

Thanks!

I’ve been calling people names for 5 years and still haven’t ranked up this sucks