Explainations of the blog points system works.

[pleconut]

Ive started this thread, where anyone that wishes to ask questions, or needs an explanation of anything in relation to the Blog stystem, can do so.

I have some questions.

When you update a Blog, for example to update on fry progress, are you awarded more points, simply just for updating it?

If you make a mistake and have to go back and make a change to it, is it considered an update, what happens regarding points then, are more added?

I would think that unless you put in a different date, to add a further report, you wouldn't receive points again until doing so. Am i correct in my thinking here?

Obviously there's some changes taking place to the Blog system, and getting it up and running so that it's correctly functioning (i mean here how it's intended to be functioning when any bugs ect are sorted out)

Maybe others will have some questions also . But lets try not to accumulate lots at once!

[Jools]

You don't get points for edits per se, it is all about filling out data.

You get points awarded for the amount of data provided. Each field entered scores one point except those that score two ('lighting', 'heating') and those that score three ('age', 'furniture', 'filtration', 'behaviour', 'segregation', 'fry_feeding'). You also get a point per image.

So, if you put in some data, click save and then you re-edit the data to add in a couple of fields, it should go up a bit.

That's what it's meant to do at least, I've not checked it since 2011 when it was last tweaked.

Jools

[pleconut]

Thanks, Jools for exlaining it better to me. I'd also somehow come to the conclusions there is more points given to those that successfully spawn species that are rare or more difficult to. Or fry success rates. But now you've cleared this up for me also, that it's about the ammout of data added, and not specific species or fry success rates .

[bekateen]

So here's a step-by-step description of the odd behavior mentioned previously (here: Bug(s) in the BLOG outputs and here: Re: Adding A Second Spawning Report):

Using my BLOG for

Panaqolus maccus

as an example, I started with 57 points and I had four foods listed as follows:

• Wood (dry / prepared) daily
• Algae Wafers (dry / prepared) occaisionally
• Live tubifex worms (live) occaisionally
• Sweet potato fresh (live) occaisionally

I deleted one food item and my points rose to 58.
I then deleted a second food item and my points remained at 58.
I deleted a third food item and the points remained at 58.
I deleted the fourth food item and my points remained at 58.

I then added back one food item and my points fell to 57.
Following that, I added back the second, the third, and the fourth food items, and the points remained at 57.

Perhaps food is accidentally coded as a -1 instead of a +1? But even then, it doesn't make sense that my points rose to 58 while I still had food items listed. Why didn't they wait until I deleted the last food item to rise to 58? Or why did they fall to 57 the moment one food item was added? Why didn't they stay at 58 until the fourth item was added back (I.e., the reverse of the subtraction I started with)?

The other oddity I find is the apparent max ceiling of points. I've reached 61 points* with my

Ancistrus cf_cirrhosus

BLOG, but I'm at 57 with Panaqolus maccus. The only field I left empty for my ABN is GH. And the only data field I have missing for P. maccus that I've filled in for my ABN is age. But age is only worth 3 points as far as I can tell. What am I missing on the P. maccus page that I can fill in? I've seen some reports that are as high as 64 pts (I don't know if anything is higher) but I just don't see more data fields to fill out. There is GH, but the other 64 pt BLOGs didn't have that filled out either.

I think that's were some of the point confusion comes in. And as I've stated elsewhere, for me as a new member and breeder, it's not the points for point sake that matters, as others have expressed a concern for the "race-to-the-top" effect, but rather I rely on the points for various species to help me know where to look first as I search for info before I undertake a breeding project of my own, with the operating assumption that the higher the points, the more info I'll find (which is obviously the premise of the point system as you explained it above, Jools; thanks for that).

Cheers, Eric

* After looking at my ABN BLOG just now, I tried changing the GH high and low boxes from 0 (their default values) to 0 (in other words, I clicked in each box, but didn't change the values of either GH number). When I clicked "Save and Publish," my points dropped from 61 to 60. Go figure! Oh, no! What have I done?!? (LOL)

P.S., Sorry, IMO my post sounds pretty whiny! I didn't intend it to do so, I just wanted to describe what I was observing.

[pleconut]

This is partially why I came to the conclusions, that what you've spawned is related to the points you get, when i first joined the forum, i had some peppered cories spawn, in all honesty, I may have not done the report correctly, filling in all the fields, as i was still familiarising myself with the site, but i know I didnt get many points. I thought it was because its not that difficult to spawn these, but if you spawned a more difficult species of cory you would get more. Then my ABNs spawned, again not rocket science, i was surprised I got that many points, as it's kind of on the peppered cory level of difficulty, ie you dont have to do much to make them spawn. But I would think, for example, if someone spawned a species of rarer pleco that needed a lot more attention to trigger them to spawn, or going even further, a species that had never been spawned in captivity, the points would rise accordingly. So when i looked at the breederboard my first thoughts always were those folks at the top, must be very skilled and are doing very well, having seen some of their threads added to me coming to these conclusions, but if I'm wrong with my assumptions it's actually more about quantity than quality.

[bekateen]

I believe, and I'd like to expect, that it's the number of completed fields that determines points, not the length of the narrative answers or the number of food items beyond "one." If it was by length of answers, Heck, given that I'm so long-winded on the narrative answers, I should have a ba-zillion points by now! Praise God we don't score it that way. LOL

I had never considered the possibility that difficulty mattered. But from what Jools said, that does not appear to be the case. And it's probably better that way (just notice how it caught your concern with your Corys).

Cheers, Eric

[pleconut]

I think the level of difficulty thing is a valid point, but now thinking more about it, it's far more important, we can all learn and develop from reading such reports. In no way whatsoever do I view this as some kind of a competition! It's more about what can be contributed so we all learn from each other, and points given for filling in as many different fields as possible, is more of an incentive and far more likely to encourage people to contribute, rather than trying to better one another.