It really grinds my gears when I see someone that has a higher blue star ranking than me, but has 100K posts. People that post so frequently are of course more likely to get more blue stars than someone with 1K posts. However, they might only have a few more blue stars. That means that their average post is of much lower quality.
We could have a ranking that is based upon the ratio of blue stars per post. This would be similar to impact factors in scientific journals. The denominator would just need to have a lower limit to prevent skewed ratings for rookies.
We could have a ranking that is based upon the ratio of blue stars per post. This would be similar to impact factors in scientific journals. The denominator would just need to have a lower limit to prevent skewed ratings for rookies.
