What inspires you to make?

I voted for "I think the making experience will help my career"

It may not. But almost every post I submit is written with the premise that it will be relevant to industrial practice.

I think making has helped my career in many ways, including helping to land jobs.

A by-product of making is writing proposals on element14, which enable making.

This is a very useful business skill to have and element14 proposals help hone that skill.

Wow - that's a lot of content!! I do something similar in that I don't explicitly link my blog posts, but I will put a sentence in the resume along the lines of "written 200+ blog posts" when mentioning other documents/presentations etc. These large numbers on their own might be good enough to convey experience in 'simplifying technology' (that's what I call it anyway, it could be called anything else depending on what people want to convey in the resume  - could be good to convey 'rapid prototyping skills' or whatever, if that's what was desired for a particular job role).

I agree too, the stars is totally broken and I'm just continually amazed that Jive has never improved it.. it's a key motivational thing to encourage people to use Jive, and it's not very end-user-friendly when broken like this. It's the online equivalent of the out-of-touch management who might criticise a project or progress without realizing the complexity or how hard the developers are working. I'm sure there's one or two examples from 'The Office'.. Example fixes could have been to just toss out the few lowest-star reports when building that star-score, given there will always be the odd person whose star-calibration is completely different to others, or a dozen other reasons. At conferences for instance, we did this because there was guaranteed to be at least one person from a competitor, deliberately marking things down. But there are plenty of non-malicious reasons too, and dropping a few worst star reports would go a long way to fixing it.

The current star system will never allow it to get back to more deserving scores, if a single person ranks something low, unless perhaps hundreds/thousands of people ranked it, which is unlikely. It's not possible to get that many views for a lot of content anyway; some content will always be slow-burning until eventually people over time actively search certain topics and make use of it, and another key weakness of the current system is that freshly-produced content might not even be visible on the radar unless people use the 'recent activity' and log on regularly.

But people must be reading them eventually, otherwise it wouldn't explain how the ranking shoots up over time. For what it's worth, I rarely click to give star ratings due to the brokenness, and would rather just click Like. But if I see any of your posts have less than 5 stars, then I click on 5 stars because I can't conceive a situation where there's bad content from you, and I believe it's disrespectful to give less than 5 stars in that case. By digging into a topic, and writing about it, you're the expert on it, so it's incomprehensible to give a lower-star report as a result. But generally I don't use the star system. There's a few cases where a low-star is deserving for really wacky or lazy or bizarre blog posts from people, but there I just don't bother to like or give any star rating generally.. and very rarely I've been motivated to give the least stars (1 star) less than 5 times in as many years perhaps. Anyway this is just my perspective when using the star system.

Anyway it's rare that people can dig deeply and write about topics with such clarity as you, those who know you know that the star is meaningless to your content. That still doesn't help and could be negative for resumes as you say though.

I am not sure if this helps, but I feel that a high number of views and likes is a greater measure of the value of blog and that the stars are just an opinion.  Jan Cumps , I know that this does not change the response that you got from the interviewer, which really is a shame.

When I had started my own company many years ago, I signed up to blog on another site.  We received payment based on number of views, as this metric was tied to the goggle ads floated along side the content.  I never made much (if any) on this model, but it did allow me to promote some of my products and content, which did lead to inquiries and even some consulting gigs. Even all these years later, some of my blogs have the highest number of views and I wear that as a sort of badge of honor.

I do think that blogging can be an asset to ones career, but I must admit, that now that I am semi-retired, I enjoy blogging as a way to payback my debt to those that helped me to understand and improve my skills when I was learning.

It is interesting how different people use the system. I don't use the star system much but when I do I always give 5 stars.

When I don't like something I generally just shun it - no comment, no like or dislike, no stars, because even negative attention is still attention.

When a posting gets a negative comment, it makes it look like it was interesting enough to comment on.

dougw  wrote:

 

>It is interesting how different people use the system. ...

True. Maybe we all kind of interpret the stars the way we feel they should be, given that the text descriptions for the ratings is not very applicable to this kind of content.

I think the problem might be as simple as the wording on the stars:

3 stars = average

4 stars = above average

5 stars = exceptional

Using those descriptions makes it EXTREMELY difficult to get anything over 3 stars really.

I feel, for this site especially, that the ratings should be more information and accuracy based, maybe something like this:

5 stars = accurate, complete, and useful

4 stars = could use some more details, but otherwise accurate and useful

3 stars = missing details, some inaccuracies, somewhat useful

2 stars = inaccurate, not very useful

1 star = misleading, dangerous, not useful

Bringing Randall and Christopher into the conversation...

rscasny

cstanton

There're good reasons why platforms such as social media only have 'like' buttons, and don't have rating systems.

While it's good to have ratings as a participation metric, having someone view that and use it as a de-facto determination as to the content's quality is not decently representative of the content's actual quality and I'd say that says a lot more about the person or company who views the content and takes it as such and that they didn't even take it upon themselves to digest the content, than for what the rating actually stands for.

You see this comparatively on Reddit, people upvote and downvote. The voting system is 'meant' to be used for representing the quality of the content, but often it is 'abused' in the way that something which people simply don't agree with can be downvoted into oblivion, even if it's presented well.

As for the 'low quality' comments of 'well done you blinked an LED', when we advertise content and people's blogs on social media, etc. You're going to get a range of people posting, commenting, liking, and a lot of those will be inexperienced, students, and similar. The more experienced users of the community are often harder to encourage to engage and comment with content when they're happy with it, unless it's something they disagree with or want to debate.

We are moving away from this Jive platform, and its content will come with it. Whether or not we have a rating system on the new one, I'll have to check, but initially I didn't see it, frankly it may be better if it wasn't there.

This is good news if you leave Jive. I usually post on Hackster.io with an editor that has few features to make your content great, but you're sure you won't lose your work. With Jive many times you end up losing your job and your time and this is a bit frustrating. So much so that you end up not reporting bugs, which is my big mistake, I must admit.

> So much so that you end up not reporting bugs, which is my big mistake, I must admit.

A regular phrase I use to the team is "this problem I'm highlighting is probably a sign of bigger problems that members aren't reporting, because it's easier for them not to".

Sadly silence is often seen as "everything's fine".

An example of that is issues with uploading videos to the site had (and sometimes still is) an issue that means people stop uploading to the site because they find workarounds which's easier to deal with than reporting the problem - though sometimes it's the case that the person thinks the issue is with their own computer/internet connection/file rather than it being the site.

It's why I often use the site as a 'user' (account) or 'user mindset' as well as staff.

Well said. I'm not a recruiter, but if I were and read blogs I would also be interested in the wealth of information that showed how that candidate conversed in the community. It would soon be obvious what their nature was like for helping others on technical matters and to me that politeness and helpfulness would go much much further than the star rates on here - which I must state I don't use nor do I really bother looking at on my own posts. I think they are anonymous which probably isn't a good thing to ensure good behaviors. Personally if I did feel compelled to use them I'd want the star system changed so the poster has their name, the rating they award and place for comment. Seeing"14RHB gives this 2 out of 5: I liked this project but for me it was too brief and I was unable to follow the finer detail" surely helps that person and gives them a chance to counter...perhaps they have already posted all that detail elsewhere.

To complicate it further, if I were to use the star system I would adjust where I marked people depending on my perception of their skills. Some members I know can do good work and their scoring would likely be completely different to where I read a newcomers blog, perhaps struggling to solder or understand the underlying concepts or even write in a non-native language to get that wider audience, but where I can see they try really hard to write that blog.

However I still find a like and comment to be far more friendly and meaningful.

That is a good point about anonymous ratings. Ratings would carry far more weight if the rater was known and especially if the reputation of the rater was good.

That is a good point about anonymous ratings. Ratings would carry far more weight if the rater was known and especially if the reputation of the rater was good.