Posts to Rec's ratio

Rather than showing total moves in the forums, a more interesting indicator would be total posts.
This would then lead to a ratio between posts and rec's.
We would therefore be able to judge our competitors on the salientcy and wit rather than just their chess playing ability.

Somewhat, but then not all the recs are gained through quality posts, so it's not that great an indication of anything.

Personally, I tend to judge each post on its own merits, rather than looking at the number of recs someone has and then biasing accordingly.

showing total nb of posts existed some time ago. but it encouraged people to spam in the fora so Russ removed it.
But recs over ttl posts could be interesting. And rec given and got recs could be interesting too.
th

I prefer to keep total moves. That way it tells me something about how involved a person is on the site. Have they played hundreds of games or just two?
I don't even bother looking at total recs. It's a useless stat. Recs aren't always given for quality of post they are given for all sorts of reasons. From making a funny joke to having a viewpoint people agree with.
I'd much rather remove the stat altogether and have the recommended posts button be useful once more. Have you ever actually read through that thing? Half the posts that have received recs are just stupid.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
I prefer to keep total moves. That way it tells me something about how involved a person is on the site. Have they played hundreds of games or just two?
I don't even bother looking at total recs. It's a useless stat. Recs aren't alway ...[text shortened]... hat thing? Half the posts that have received recs are just stupid.

Ok, maybe I'm about to say something very stupid, but how exactly do you give someone rec?

Originally posted by NostalJim
Ok, maybe I'm about to say something very stupid, but how exactly do you give someone rec?

Eh, no. Do you have to be a subscriber?

I guess so, or else people could just make fake accounts and give themselves rec.