Project Everest

How Crowdicity works - bringing the best out in people through competition... and fair play

Andrew Vild
Andrew Vild | Jul 27, 2017 | in Discussion forum

I have been tasked with Game Master. Mostly because I have a reputation for being a nerd and enjoying gaming, but also because I have a keen interest in this space and in utilising this platform, we want to ensure that the points you accumulate also result in meaningful contributions, comments, ideas etc. 

So without boring you with the entire guts of the gamification system (and I am sure many would want to know the mechanics of it!), I want to give you a basic overview of the logic behind the points system, some recent changes we have been making and why. 

Before we go into that, I want to make sure we are facilitating the environment for meaningful and legitimate contributions within this space. As admins, we can see where the points are coming from. Whether you're getting points from following 300 people or from posting good ideas that are up voted and commented upon - the latter is the current trend from what can be seen in those in the top 20, which is great and means we are doing something right! 

At the end of the day, we want good ideas on here and to follow up on them and see them happen in real life. We will definitely approach and talk to you about your ideas and where it came from and where you see it going in future - so just be sure you know about the content you're posting. 

To this end, optimising how you get points will be an ever changing process. I think of it like League of Legends, a multiplayer online battle arena game. Every week or month they come up with updates on skills, damage output, defensive stats etc to ensure a fair battlefield, to adjust for loopholes that players find and to keep it enjoyable for all. 

So! I will lay out the "logic" behind the points system that aims to correlate directly to valuable contributions and ultimately, a more successful and engaging platform. 

- Ideas are worth some points... worth much more if they are a good idea.

- Up votes are worth more than ideas. Ideas give you a base amount for the post, but significantly more if 4 or more people upvote the idea.

- Comments are also very lucrative. Good ideas will generate upvotes and interest, which will result in comments. If your idea has minimal comments, maybe you need to be asking for input or reviewing your content to ensure it is of value to the community.

- Commenting is now less lucrative, but lucrative all the same. Previously, commenting and being commented on was worth the same amount. This resulted in comments for the sake of comments, like "good job", "great idea". We want to promote more constructive and value-adding comments though, so we have scaled the comment value down, but kept the points for comments getting "thumbs up".

- Following users is worth less than being followed. Same logic as above and to ensure you don't get into the top 20 by just following everyone on Crowdicity. It has been argued there should be no points for follows - however, it does encourage activity and engagement and that will then lead to meaningful contributions.

- Following an idea. Same as the above. 

- Idea outcomes. This is the exciting part and where some serious points are allocated. If an idea is given stars by admins then you get points (scaling with the number of stars). If an idea is partially adopted you get a significant number of points, if completely adopted you'll be making some serious jumps up the leaderboard.

Badge System

We will also be developing a badge system in the near future. Badges can only be manually applied to users, but it will make them more sought after and will be associated with more points. An example of where badges may be applied is an excellent idea post that Project Everest thinks should be on our "official" blog thread and is then transposed to that. 

Input from the community on ideas or thoughts behind the mechanics of the points system is always welcome. The system is open to change and can always be moved back if it doesn't work. 

Last but not least, if a change is made, eg. 3 points for a follow down to 1 point, then it will apply to everyone's history so that no one is unfairly affected (unless your collection of points was completely based on following others and asking them to follow you in return).

edited on Jul 27, 2017 by Andrew Vild

Riley Harris Jul 27, 2017

Good work!

Users tagged:

Reply 1

Andrew Vild Jul 27, 2017

I appreciate the support! Please ensure the practice of constructive comments that contribute to the topic. The purpose of this idea/post was to dissuade comments that don't contribute and to try encourage activity that actively is moving the concept forward, not just being active for the sake of being active.

Reply 0

Ella Grier Jul 27, 2017

I back this. I believe a lot of time and deliberation has been put into re-managing the system to ensure that people with contribution of most value are the beneficiaries of points and rankings. I think over the course of July it has improved significantly and that people who are able to move up in the system, at any rate, are those with ideas in quantity and quality. This is as opposed people who are able to move up with follows and handing out votes/comments like yesterday’s candy.
The fact that a contributer's ability to gain points and move up/down the ranks is not time sensitive is also valuable because many ideas are only realised toward the end of a project month and activities in week four of the project allow for these ideas to be properly conceptualised and posted.

The structure of project challenges (eg. Health Assessment Malawi) within catagories (eg. Health Assessment), where trekkers can comment progress/insights pertaining to that challenge and then make additional post about where the project can go and ideas relating to potential products, has added value to the system as well. Perhaps measures could be take to ensure this is practiced consistently across assessment projects

Reply 4