Showing how much you rate

I think this is a good new feature as it will show how much people put back into the site as well as writing there.

It's a rubbish idea.

It doesn't seem to measure quality of rating, which might be useful, but rather quantity.

In terms of what I've taken from the site (i.e. nothing) compared to the number of article pairs I've rated, I should be well in there, but oh no. So, as far as the rating is concerned, the stars thing is useless and just another crap feature by Helium staff to try and encourage people to go through Helium's incredibly clumsy and hugely flawed rating system.

It's just another system for Helium to create an upper echelon of member that newbies will pander to, thus creating a system whereby your standing around the site says more than your ability to string sentences together or the quality of the rating you do.

Just like Ciao.

Is there a Queen of Helium yet?

What do you mean by quality of rating? Dooyoo only show quanitity of rating which helps in me deciding if I want to rate othrs or not. How do you gauge quality of rating?

Oh Mr Member, you really love Helium don't you. Ha.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

Just like Ciao.

I must say I was thinking this. They are going down that route more and more, which is a shame.

Quote :

Is there a Queen of Helium yet?

I don't have a problem with the idea but can't see why it need be anything more than a statistic. Many of Helium's ideas are fine. It's the implementation that has yet to win me over.

WendyBull wrote:

What do you mean by quality of rating? Dooyoo only show quanitity of rating which helps in me deciding if I want to rate othrs or not. How do you gauge quality of rating?

I don't know, but I don't understand why listing how much someone has rated is of any importance on Helium seeing as the only mechanism for rating is the drip feed method based semi-randomly on what you posted before and the fact that member reads count for bugger all squared. The rating system itself is a hugely flawed concept, but at the same time, supposed to be anonymous, so what does it matter if I, for example, haven't rated one article pairing?

The Polar One wrote:

Oh Mr Member, you really love Helium don't you. Ha.

Achilly, Mr One Helium was a far better site when I originally joined and had bags and bags of potential, none of which was realised. As time has gone on, they've implemented more and more features that bring it closer in line with the norm i.e. Dooyoo, Ciao and Epinions all of which follow a set structure. It seems that some people just have to have their community, and that's taken the focus away from writing. The lack of community on the main site was Helium's selling point in the first place.

I suppose, as a hobbyist, I also got turned off by all the wankers shouting on the forum about their "writing", moaning about those that didn't have the communications skills to match the big names on Helium and yet the amount of cheating and lack of integrity shown by a lot of people during the first big (churning) competition was astonishing. It left a bad taste in the mouth, I tell you.

Ciao's Favourite Member wrote:

WendyBull wrote:

What do you mean by quality of rating? Dooyoo only show quanitity of rating which helps in me deciding if I want to rate othrs or not. How do you gauge quality of rating?

I don't know, but I don't understand why listing how much someone has rated is of any importance on Helium seeing as the only mechanism for rating is the drip feed method based semi-randomly on what you posted before and the fact that member reads count for bugger all squared. The rating system itself is a hugely flawed concept, but at the same time, supposed to be anonymous, so what does it matter if I, for example, haven't rated one article pairing?

But surely it is a good thing to see that someone is putting something back into the site as well as writing. Isn't the money dished out by articles being rated?

No, the money is, as far as I can tell, dished out by non-member reads in some shape or form. That's why the argument was on here a few months back about Rachel allowing Helium members to link to their work on Helium. Though if it's the only thing taken into consideration, that remains to be seen.

On sites such as Dooyoo, Ciao etc. where member reads/rates count towards your earnings, then I can see the argument for listing site activity to other members, but on Helium it seems to me to be a waste of time and just stats/community features for the sake of adding them. They have no value, therefore no place on the site.

Perhaps someone could clarify the rating system and whether it helps you achieve more money? I thought if I read an individuals review it gave them some money - but perhapos that doesn't work for when you are comparing articles. If this is the case then member rating stats are maybe not so important - although still interesting.

I don't know if anyone can, Wendy. It's shrouded in secrecy, just like the Ciao system (only possibly more so, if that's possible).

There is only rumour and assumption to go on.

Oh, and you raise another point... the new stats don't take into consideration reads given outside of the rating mechanism.

The rating system doesn't pay anything. What it does do is to order the articles and if you think of the logic of it, the nearer the top of the pile the article is, the more likely it will be to be read.

That's true, it's still interesting though.

Thingywhatsit wrote:

The rating system doesn't pay anything. What it does do is to order the articles and if you think of the logic of it, the nearer the top of the pile the article is, the more likely it will be to be read.

Only by people reading around the site. Helium did, the last time I checked, encourage members to go off and link to their own work, drawing people into the site, essentially doing a lot of Helium's SEO work for them.

There could easily be a scenario where my topic might not have any rates applied to it, but I could be the most read review on Helium, if I'd done my off-site homework correctly.

Wow, there seems to be a lot of hate for Helium. It makes me wonder why I joined this forum.

But, I know I was intrigued from the start, just to hear what other people had to say.

I, personally, love Helium. I've been on for a few months, and written some articles. I find the staff to be helpful and quick in their replies. I also find the "community" to be a great asset.

The rating system boggles my mind a bit, but it doesn't turn me off to the whole process.

I also find the contests to be a bit stressful. So, I just avoid them.

I don't know, can someone please explain to me what all the anger and hatered for Helium is about?

Thanks.

Not sure really. I think these are reviewers from consumer sites that didnt like the way Helium worked, although not many participate with Helium now. We really must get this portion of the site up to scratch with all the new stuff going on on Helium as so much has happened since these initial postings.

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Caroline Ross wrote:

I don't know, can someone please explain to me what all the anger and hatered for Helium is about?

Thanks.

Hah!

Well, where do I start?

(And please note, these are only my points of view. The other so-called Helium Haters may have different ideas)

When I first joined Helium, it was a lot rougher around the edges. However, it lacked a community. Community is something that has, IMO, ruined other sites, such as Ciao. Quality material is/was ignored on these site in favour of a writer's profile or their relationships with other members. Helium looked as if it might actually concentrate on the content and the lack of community was extremely appealing.

That all disappeared within weeks. Members that left fawning comments to/about Helium on the message board gained regular spots on the front page. There were cries for more community focus in terms of tools etc. and I'm sure there's no coincidence that these cries for community stuff came shortly after an influx of Ciao members.

The rating system is a joke. Not being able to choose what to rate is a fundamental mistake in trying to get content sorted.

They launched a competition that encouraged nothing but "churning" (i.e. the posting of large numbers of articles with the emphasis on quantity over quality). The amount of so-called writers whoring themselves for cents was pretty disgusting. People that wanted to surf and write on the site for a couple of hours per week were just frozen out as the weekly winners were submitting HUNDREDS of articles.

For the first five months I was a member, I saw nothing to make me believe that Helium cared about the content of articles over and above certain "rules". Entire categories were/are unsorted to quality (of content).

For the first two or three weeks I was a member, my articles never moved up or down the rankings in their categories. That's far too slow for an internet site and doesn't provide any incentive to write further. Articles should be sorted within days, at the very most.

As a UK resident, the pay rates were extremely poor versus the time invested (in comparison to other sites).

These new quick poll things that they included when they "improved" the rating system go unpaid. You couldn't opt out of them, so they kept appearing during the rating process.

I got the impression from the message boards that if you didn't buy in to the whole "oh, look at us, we're aspiring professional writers" thing and just wanted some fun, then your time was wasted.

One of the staff members regularly took a spot on the front page was "writing tips" that, at the time, seemed to concentrate more on the rules of writing rather than be concerned with content. I think staff members posting on the site is a good thing, but the front page exposure should be a reward to members for good articles. Staff members shouldn't be there. Additionally, while all these "writing tips" were being posted, Helium's tag line was/is "Where Knowledge Rules" and there were plenty of writers who were posting on topics they knew nothing about, quite frankly, but were hailed as greatness itself.

I'm sure others will have different ideas, but there's mine.

You can read some of them here:

http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/internet-sites/helium-com/

For me, it was being forced to rate the same type of reviews over and over that turned me off the place. I haven't been on it for months, andI don't even understand what they do or how it operates, because I cannot get past rating the same type of boring articles!

That changes though Helen as the more areas you contribute to, the more you get in the way of choice. Now I hardly get any of the same topics, and the range I am rating compared to in February when I first joined is enormous.

Ciao! (or as I will call you Mr. Angry)

I do appreciate the amount of time you put into responding to me. It is very well thought out, and actually doesn't sound angry at all.

I do like Helium, but I appreciate the fact that you don't.

Now, tell me what you do like. What are you passionate about, what do you spend your time doing that makes you smile. I would like to get to know you better, as something more than Mr. Angry.

What do I like on Helium?

Well, it has been a while. The staff were very quick to get back to me and were very thorough in their replies when I contacted them directly. I think the forum on the site has its uses, though the amount of fawning and fanboy-ism that went on was a negative aspect. The fact you can write about almost anything was a good thing.

Wow, well thanks!

But, I wanted to know what you like in life.

Your frustrated with Ciao, and Helium. What are you pleased with.

I did read one of your Ciao reviews. Something about watching TV on your computer. It was thorough, I learned something, but too long for my liking. I didn't read it all, but I got the point.

Well, thank you ma'am.

Thingywhatsit wrote:

That changes though Helen as the more areas you contribute to, the more you get in the way of choice. Now I hardly get any of the same topics, and the range I am rating compared to in February when I first joined is enormous.

I remain sceptical...

I find its categorisation difficult to contribute anything anyway!

You are most welcome, kind sir!

helencbradshaw wrote:

I remain sceptical...

I find its categorisation difficult to contribute anything anyway!

IT just shows you that one mans meat is another mans poison. The one thing that stands out for me about Helium is the fact that I can write about such diverse topics as medieval theatre, the role of the French in Americas Independance, spirituality, philosoph, environmental issues, politics etc rather than just product reviews.

The monetry return does take a while to build up, though I have only been a memeber a year and probably make £5-£10 p.m. even in the months that I don't add anything new. Then againwho does this for the money? It amazes me the amount of people that complain about the rewards on such sites but then talk about the quality and integrity of articles. The two are generally mutually exclusive.

As for the rating system, well I know its not the way the game should be played but try not bothering to rate anything for a while and see what happens.