Leader Board helpful or toxic for a community?

[SJ77]

This debate has come up on my site.

Some saying that it creates "stressful competition" leading to a "toxic site"

Others saying it's a powerful navigation tool. (and by others I mean mostly me)

I've had these types of metrics and tools on the site for 12 years. I wonder why only now is it a problem.

I am wondering what your thoughts are?

do you use the leader board on your site?

Do your members like it?

[AA15]

I personally think it's great! To those who don't want to compete, I feel they should not be bothered to look at it and just enjoy

[SJ77]

This was some interesting feedback

Quote

 

 I am so sorry I know you must be swamped but I wanted to give you an idea for the exposure problem. I was afraid to post in the big forum because I didn't want to upset anyone.

 

I don't mind the leaderboards I completely understand why they are there. But I believe there are better data points that can be looked at which when it comes to the leaderboards.

If someone post 100 times per day and each post only gets 1 like they still get 100 points for the day. But lets say someone only post once and they get 80 likes it is less likes but the post to like ratio is more impressive.  

 

There are some newer members who might get a lot of likes but because they don't spam post they don't get the same recognition. From a user standpoint I feel like it is annoying to get spammed by the same members/similar type post.

 

If you base the leader board off of a percentage between post and reaction I feel like it would give a better representation of quality content/members and it will stop members from spamming because it would lower their percentage.

 

For example if we look at the mysite member list (Not trying to throw anyone under the bus just using this as an example)  Gina has a content count of 219 and 42,637 points(reaction/likes not sure what to call them) so this is a like ratio of 152 likes per post. If we look at GGG she has 1597 content count and 38,893 points that only a like ratio of 24 likes per post.

 

So what if there is a new member and she get a lot of likes per post but she doesn't post as frequently she will never make the top leader board because she will always get drowned out. Just because you post a lot does it actually mean you have the highest quality content?

 

I believe the best way to run the leaderboard and offer the most exposure to new and different members is to base it off of a reactions to post ratio percentage. (It can be quite challenging for newer members to compete with high amounts of likes with other members who have been on the site for 3+ years, the only way to get that many likes is to spam post frequently which I just don't think gives the users the best experience possible) So I don't think the newer members are really being set up for the most success and it can really hurt their self confidence.

 

I also think changing this will make members more aware of their post and will allow for them to only post the best quality status updates and forum post.  

 

Not sure if any of this makes sense or is something that is possible but just thought it could give you something to think about. 🙂

 

Thank you so much for taking the time to read all of this! 

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by SJ77

[CoffeeCake]

I think the leaderboard feature is good for content that is largely objective (answers to homework questions, how to, technical discussion, support), and is dangerous for content that is largely subjective (opinions, politics, art, personal preferences).

It would be great to tabulate this data but have the option to only make it visible to administrators or by usergroup. I don't think that's how it works now.

[opentype]

1 hour ago, Paul E. said:

have the option to only make it visible to administrators or by usergroup. 

Well, one can show the Leaderboard link in the menu only to certain user groups. That should already do the trick. It’s unlikely that people who never see that link will access it through other means frequently. 

[jair101]

Toxic, definitely.

In its current state I will never enable Leaderboard. It is essentially a battle for likes, which is not how quality content should be measured and all members will be put off by the fact that a long well thought posts have less value then a funny meme. By enabling it, you kinda put an official sticker that likes are all that matters for your community, which will be off-putting for the members who are not part of the chit-chat/spam group. 

I can never figure out why IPS went to the length of developing this feature and just left it there without improvements in the last few version iterations. It has a lot of promise as groundwork layer for a comprehensive gamification solution, but leaving it in its current state it is nothing more then a glorified like counter and does way more harm then good. 

[Joey_M]

3 hours ago, jair101 said:

In its current state I will never enable Leaderboard. It is essentially a battle for likes, which is not how quality content should be measured and all members will be put off by the fact that a long well thought posts have less value then a funny meme. By enabling it, you kinda put an official sticker that likes are all that matters for your community, which will be off-putting for the members who are not part of the chit-chat/spam group. 

I agree to a point with this, however, I think it depends on the community and the sites members.

On mine I feel the Leaderboard has lead to better engagement posts, most see it as a fun little activity which isn't seen as competition (more praise). Also, site admin and team members can help with the negative side that you mentioned, as I have had an increase of banter and knowledgeable posts simply because my team acknowledges effort and, I feel this enforces the community to view it the same way.

[jesuralem]

My site was on vbulletin for 15 years and never had a leaderboard.

When I migrated to ips I let the leaderboard as it is out of the box and actually nobody gives a damn about it.