What would you think about this MHO setup?

So, the MHO thing is a point of contention for some people. Many people are a little too quick to firmly insist it doesn't matter (doth ye protest too much?), and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't, but it's a feature that involves numbers that definitely exists.

You probably don't know me, but any sort of "feature involving numbers" is precisely the sort of thing that causes me to think of ways to optimize it. I like games, and MHO is a game. And like all games, when I play them (as long as they are at least a little bit enjoyable) I try to come up with ways to improve them - to balance them.

But MHO has another function beyond just the game - it's also supposed to indicate, to a reader, how much 'weight' the general community has decided that a person's opinion carries. But there are shortcoming with the current setup.

So, this is what I've come up with for MHO:
1) The current system is simply the number of MHO divided by total number of questions answered. That is your percent MHO. In the setup I'm proposing, first this would have to be renamed to "MHO rating," or just rating. For now, you can think of this rating as just the percentage, but I'll explain the differences. Whatever your percentage is will always be the minimum rating you can obtain.
2) Any opinions given after the MHO is already assigned for a question would no longer count towards the MHO rating.
3) At any point, the question asker has the option to disable MHO. They can never re-enable it, but a disabled MHO also does not count towards the MHO rating of those who have given their opinion on it.
4) Certain types of questions would automatically have MHO disabled (i. e. the 'how do I look?' questions).
5) The effect receiving MHO has on your rating is increased on questions for which there are more opinions.
6) By contrast, the effect that not receiving MHO has on your rating is decreased for questions in which there are more opinions.

I'm nearly out of room, so I'll explain 5 and 6 in an update.

  • Do it!
    Vote A
  • Sounds fine, I guess.
    Vote B
  • It really, really, doesn't matter.
    Vote C
  • Meh. Just leave it how it is.
    Vote D
  • Absolutely not
    Vote E
  • See results
    Vote F
Select a gender to cast your vote:
I'm a GirlI'm a Guy
For simplicity, let's say a user has answered a total of 9 questions, and has only received MHO once - an MHO percentage of 11%

He (or she) answers another question. There are four possible outcomes:
1) Many people answer, and this user receives MHO
2) Few people answer, and this user receives MHO
3) Many people answer, and this user does not receive MHO
4) Few people answer, and this user does not receive MHO

(to be continued)
For the first two cases, the MHO percentage is now 20%, but the rating will be higher for the first case. If there is sufficiently 'many' opinions for the question, being awarded MHO may even count as two MHOs, giving a rating of 30.
Oh, a 7th point might be that the weight of MHOs given by the same person to the same person might be diminished. I. e. if i gave the same person 40 MHOs, and no one else, that might only count as 10 MHOs or something..


Most Helpful Girl

  • I think it's a good idea and you make a good point, I actually never considered any of that honestly until you brought it to my attention lol

    Some people like me though, just answer anyway regardless because we don't care/don't pay attention.


Most Helpful Guy

  • I recommended similar things long way back to the admins but they didn't implement it. But I didn't lose hope yet. You made brilliant points. I marked this question as 'trending'. Hope more people will read this question now.
    [Voted A]
    Cheers! :)

    • sweet. I don't really know what 'trending' means, but thank you :-)

    • Super/Uber Mods and admins can mark posts as trending. Trended post are highlighted more on the site helping the post to get more attention :)

Have an opinion?

What Girls Said 1

  • I really really really don't care. I didn't even read it. If you want to fix the MHO, you'd first have to stop any bias that people have when giving it to award the points to the best possible answer... and yet that can't be done.

    So to try to regulate or fix it is a bit silly to me. And this is coming from one of the people who DOES do biased MHOs at times... lol.


What Guys Said 5

  • Problem is that some people, unite few giv MHO only to their friends, or to only 'politically correct' answers, o the percentage doesn't correlate to 'well thought out' or'insightful' answers, but to who is popular in the cliques of frequent posters...

    But it 's a step up from having to wade through two word point grubbing from the know nothings who answer every question, even when they have nothing to offer!

  • I very much agree. The MHO system is too basic right now and doesn't account for factors like that. I agree with all of those recommendations.

  • Very good ideas while worthwhile more than likely a programming nightmare

    • It's not that hard actually.
      Just a matter of calculation.

    • no, they should be pretty easy. the first four are just a matter of selection: i. e. "include this. Don't include that".

      The 5th and 6th could be handled with a simple count of opinions given. i. e, the end result could be something like this:

      R = 100 x M/(T - A - sum (exp (1-G), for all G in T and not in A)))

      Where, R is rating. M is total MHOs awarded, T is total opinions given, A is total opinions given after MHO was already selected or with MHO disabled, and G is the total number of opinions given for each question answered.

  • Dude your rant is too long I am not gonna read that but who gives a shit to be honest lol

    • I'm not sure you fully understand what a "rant" is...

    • Show All
    • sorry, I guess it didn't occur to me that English might not be a language you are comfortable using. Didn't mean to offend..

    • Its okay bro no worries XD

  • Great points, did you contact the admins?
    I think it's a really good idea.

    • I briefly wrote them about some of this, but I don't really know how reliable their feedback system is. I figure it's just as likely for them to see it here as through their feedback system, and if they deem it a 'good' idea, the medium through which they are exposed to it shouldn't matter.