Notes From Nature Talk

Transcription leaders?

  • asallans by asallans scientist

    We haven't yet implemented leaderboards as NfN is just getting started (but already has 25k transcriptions!), but I'm curious to know who's the leader with the most transcriptions so far? How many do you all have? How many do you think will be complete by the end of today?

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    I think a leaderboard is a super neat idea? I wonder if its easy to get set up?

    Posted

  • SandersClan by SandersClan

    Although I know I would be nowhere near the top of a leaderboard I know that those of us who are goal-oriented (and maybe a little competitive) would like some of the extra motivation it would offer.

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    added this as a possible enhancement on our issue tracker. I like the idea too!

    Posted

  • Noharrr by Noharrr

    Agreed - a leaderboard is a super idea! I also r e a l l y want the badge function to be upgraded to something like the great system at Khan Academy.

    Posted

  • nosenabook by nosenabook

    Not sure I care who is leading, but I do want to know where I stand!

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    I like the idea of some sort of ranking that might not be a leader board exactly but that might give you your individual "placement" among those transcribing. Given a couple other priorities on NfN, this might not happen tomorrow, but it will hopefully be something that can be further discussed soon.

    Posted

  • nosenabook by nosenabook

    Sounds cool.

    Posted

  • SandersClan by SandersClan

    Might incite a little friendly competition...hmmmmm, I'm only 4 transcriptions away from 2000th place...

    Posted

  • geckzilla by geckzilla

    Curious as I am to see such statistics, I'd vote against a leader board. I think I understand what you mean, though robgur. Something without ranks but more like...

    • John Smith
    • Peter Parker
    • Jane Doe
    • YOU!
    • Bobby McBob
    • Joe Schmoe
    • Annabelle Lee

    Then I'd have an know that Jane Doe and Bobby McBob have done a similar number of transcriptions as me. It wouldn't necessarily start a race to be the most prolific transcriber out there.

    Posted

  • SandersClan by SandersClan

    All right, I'm convinced. You have a great point, geckzilla, and one that I hadn't really considered.

    Posted

  • ghewson by ghewson

    A problem is that it's faster to transcribe insect records than plant records, ISTM (partially because the species doesn't need transcribing). Maybe have separate boards for insects and plants? Ooh, and birds, when they fly in.

    Posted

  • SandersClan by SandersClan

    Haha. Fly in.

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    I like the plan of a relative ranking (no names) that is collection specific, but it also means that people might feel compelled to "specialize" which might also be a shame. When we have talked about these ideas with Zooniverse folks, there has been a general "worried" vibe because of all these complicated issues....

    Posted

  • SandersClan by SandersClan

    Can we help un-complicate things somehow? 😃

    Posted

  • geckzilla by geckzilla

    Has ranking ever been done on any other Zooniverse projects? I can't think of any off hand. There's only ever been the test images to try to calculate an individual's accuracy. It's probably best to avoid it completely unless you want your users to start acting weird. Will collections ever reach a final 100% done status? Maybe statistics could be posted then.

    Posted

  • nosenabook by nosenabook in response to geckzilla's comment.

    The blog mentions additions being made over the course of two years or more. If ranking worries Zooniverse people, then never mind the rankings. They have some experience, let's not ignore them. There's plenty of other nifty things they could be adding.

    I do appreciate geckzilla's comment about users "starting to act weird," as though we aren't weird already.

    Posted

  • geckzilla by geckzilla

    Touché

    Posted

  • SandersClan by SandersClan in response to nosenabook's comment.

    I'm so not weird. What on earth could possibly be weird about Butt Mountain jokes and developing a sudden desire to read about ILFs that aren't ILFs? Also, it's not like I've become afflicted with the need to mumble (or laugh) at my computer screen almost constantly. And I almost never find myself getting out the magnifying glass to more closely examine the roly-polies my daughter keeps bringing inside. Nope. Almost never.

    Posted

  • jamac41 by jamac41

    A potential solution to some of the problems could be to expand the badge system, and show who is at which badge level for each project. It's less competitive, in that you aren't directly vying for a slot, so won't bring out as many potentially negative inclinations from being 'dethroned' of your current ranking. It may well push against 'specialisation', as getting lower badges in other sets is easier than aiming for the higher badges in one set. Of course, it may well have problems I haven't noticed as well.

    Going by a post of the Old Weather blog (to my knowledge the only project at the moment that gives direct comparisons of scores), http://blog.oldweather.org/2012/09/05/theres-a-green-one-and-a-pink-one-and-a-blue-one-and-a-yellow-one/ , and assuming a similar distribution, an overall top x rankings table would be useless as rankings will probably follow a rough exponential distribution.

    Posted

  • riskingraisin by riskingraisin in response to robgur's comment.

    I like the idea of a list where you see your name & number of transcriptions in the context of other people's numbers, but with their names anonymized. I also think it would be great if you could see it split out between collections and as total transcriptions.

    Posted

  • riskingraisin by riskingraisin in response to robgur's comment.

    As for "specializing," I've already done that (never transcribed a CalBug record).

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    I dont think a relative anonymized ranking would be too hard. Let me try again with the Zooniverse folks.

    Posted

  • Dragonwalker by Dragonwalker

    I like the idea also. I have only just started so only have done 55 (all Calbug), but I have no idea how high others have gone: 1000? 2000? 4500? It would be great to see how others are getting along.
    I worked with Stardust@home for a while and they ranked based on accuracy as well (they would throw in slides that had been completed and it was a test). I don't think it would be possible here, but the rank system was nice.

    Posted

  • darryluk by darryluk

    I split mine and should soon be on 2000 of each soon!

    Posted

  • robgur by robgur scientist, admin

    We've been bandying around some ideas ... will see what people think of them as soon as some percolate to the top.

    Posted

  • greenman-23 by greenman-23

    I have a golden rule not to engage in competitive exercises that don't involve a ball. So Please treat this properly, as a co-operative venture where all contributions, regardless of how big or small, are treated equally: and leave competition to where it belongs, on the sports field.
    Science and taxonomy are not 'games' in which expedience is valued over accuracy. Whilst I suspect a pragmatist (a philosophy of believing or telling any old lie to get what you want) would disagree but I would aver that turning it into a competition not only distracts from the true objective but may discourage others (including myself) from taking part.

    Posted

  • nosenabook by nosenabook in response to greenman-23's comment.

    I admit to bragging here when I reached 1000 transcriptions. But when I see that others have reached double that and more, it does kind of kill the joy. So I agree with greenman. Ranking the transcribers only encourages competition which in this case is certainly counterproductive.

    I would encourage the MODERATOR/SCIENTISTS to get the transcription timelines to work on everybody's personal page. Accurate counts there would be salve for this competitive itch.

    Posted

  • brittanygs by brittanygs

    I've wondered as well; I'm at 465 for SERNEC & curious how many people have done 1000 or more.

    Are there any plans to recognize the most prolific transcribers once the project is finished?

    Posted

  • brittanygs by brittanygs in response to greenman-23's comment.

    What about recognizing people for their sustained contribution over an extended period of time? It would be interesting to see how many have stuck with the project for x amount of time, then, as opposed to highest # of entries. Perhaps those two factors could somehow be plotted/averaged?

    Posted