On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:44:01 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Every now and then I look at the Google Groups
"About this group" page for roff:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.o...ly/about?hl=en

Of the most frequent posters several have somehow been given
"ratings". I haven't figured out how one gives or gets a "rating"
but most everybody who has a "rating" is rated 3 stars out of 5.

rw has 10 "ratings", average 3 stars
'Tripper 8, average 3
I have 7, average 3
Tom Nakashima 23, average 3
Scott Seidman 55, average 3
Louie LaPlac 1 "rating" of 3
and roff's star poster BJ Conner 1 "rating" of 4 stars.

There is one other frequent poster who has 33 "ratings"
to date and he averages 1 star out of 5. I won't name
him, that is left as an exercise for the reader. ;-)

The whole rating thing is a Google Groups paradigm. If you've ever been stuck
using their newsgroup interface (and I do mean "stuck") you'll see their
rating widget with every post you read.

What I find interesting is that someone would actually go through the
(admittedly modest) effort of rating posts just to stick them with a "3". I
mean, if it was moi, I'd only bother to peg the utter loser posts (with a 1,
of course) and the truly brilliant posts (with a 5, natch) and leave the rest
to the judgement of the unwashed masses...

/daytripper (the whole numbers thing reminds me of "The Prisoner")