Lonkero,
Given the formula & the information displayed for each member at least 3 variables need to be stored.
a) count of members who voted for you
b) sum of the weights of persons who voted for you(a member's weight is their numerical star ratings)
c) sum of the weighted scores given you = sum of( (member Weight)x(score given by member))
Then what is displayed is
Votes = a
Rating = (c/b)
Note variables "a" has no relationship with a member's weight or star rating & this is why MCA sees his vote as counting for 1 all the time but in the second variable (c/b) he is implicitly being counted as 4.99 members while Shawn is being counted as 4.86 members.
In finality pour moi,
The fact that I am infrequent contributor gave me a rather high rating score. Somewhat amusingly my 2 votes of 5-stars gives me more influence than either Shawn or MCA. Bizarre, I am a head of the Batman & Superman of this board!
I kind of agree with Shawn & several others that maybe we are taking this too seriously. I am kind of suprised at myself for getting involved since in all my history here, I had only voted 3 times & received only 2 votes in return. It was a part of the system that I never felt comfortable with & I opted out of it for that reason.
I am glad if my comments result in Radimus getting a 5-star rating because he deserves it but I promise this is my last comment on this subject.
[ 09 June 2002, 16:33: Message edited by: JackLothian ]
_________________________
Jack