Rating of Communities|
[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 4 most recent journal entries recorded in
Where COMMUNITIES get rated's LiveJournal:
|Tuesday, August 2nd, 2005|
Okay I've neglected this community for awhile and people actually started promoting things in it!! Also I neglected to make it so non-members can't make entries. Fact is, we can't have this thing filled up with entries by people promoing things. (but we can and intend to have this thing filled up with entries rating specific communities which wanted to promo themselves. So apply via comment here and it will become an entry)
So here's the deal if you want to promo your community here (an admirable aspiration). Comment to this entry with the following:
1. name of community (you could linkity the name here, as in ratecommunities
2. purpose of community
3. why there is any merit in pursuing the above purpose
4. what makes the community different from other communities with a similar purpose
5. (if applicable) name any other related communities that maybe (a) many members of your community are also members of, (b) your community originally splintered off of or (c) your community has declared war on (d) etc...
6. go ahead and post the picture/banner your community invariably is pandering around for pomo purposes, if you must.
We'll try to get an entry dedicated to your community posted once you have followed the above steps.
|Thursday, June 23rd, 2005|
There are a number of communities that rate journals, but too many to process them all and no clear indication of which ones are better places to look than others -- obviously these communities need to be rated. The communities I speak of are: _awesome_ljs, _journalreviews, acquaint, youcantwrite, journalreviews, journaltypes, journal_ratingz, journalrating, ljratings, ljreview, rankyourlj, ratemyjournal, review_you, _ljratings, cool_ljs, kickassjournals, rateit. See, way too many. We need to pare that down to those with reliable results.
Project ongoing. Results forthcoming. At this time anyone's thoughts on the matter are welcome. Leave comments.
|Wednesday, June 22nd, 2005|
To get things started we are going to review several communities right now. This may not match the thoroughness or procedures that will be utilized once we get going. I suppose someone can remotion for a reconsideration of these communities at a later time. For now however:
Case # 1 - ehippy
Categories: rating, hippie, hippie rating, new
Age of community: one week
Comments per entry: 4
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: insipid
Other: A rating community for hippies??!? Are you fucking kidding me?!
Verdict: Totally lame. Actually I suppose it might serve a purpose as a method to identify total hypocrit hippies. So far it gets my lowest rating, though I suppose its the best in the category of hippie related ratings communities?
Case # 2 - pro_frasky
Categories: anti-cool, Fittzian
Members: 16 (+.5 / month)
Entries per month: .78
Comments per entry: 1.64
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: Enlightened
Other: supports the use of interesting words
Verdict: awesome. Frasky even.
Case # 3 - _____elite
Categories: general personal rating, rating,
Age of community: Four months
Entries per month: 2
Comments per entry: 4.63
Members: 5 (+1.25 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: vapid
Other: "____"s in names are lame. half the posts are calls to everyone to promote.
Verdict: lame (F), dying.
Case # 4 - hot_or_die
Categories: general personal rating, rating
Entries / month: 21
Comments per entry: 16.25
Members: 178 (+8.48 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: banal
Other: "...because _hottasfuck_ already has enough sluts. THIS IS THE ONLY RATING COMMUNITY THAT MATTERS. You get in based on looks, your taste and intelligence." - the userinfo
Verdict: lame (F)
Case # 5 - ucdavis
Categories: geographic, university, UC Davis
Entries per month: 210
Comments per entry: 15.5
Members: 932 (+27.7 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: a few nuggets of intellect imedded in a lot of flavourless fluff.
Other: 1trophi is the self declared king?
Verdict: if you're into that kind of thing (C). Personally I live in the requisite geographic area but find the community to be a waste of space on my friends page... and my friends page is looking pretty dreary these days! A better UC Davis community is:
Case # 6 - ucdavass
Categories: geographic, university, UC Davis
Entries per month: 1.77
Comments per entry: 3.00
Members: 44 (+1.69 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: Strangely excited by pictures of local rumps
Other: 1trophi is not the self declared king.
Verdict: The definitive UC Davis community, at least as long as Daviswiki doesn't count. (B</b>)
Case # 7 - ratemypic
Categories: appearance rating, rating
Entries per month: 6.54
Comments per entry: 4.46
Members: 66 (+2.54 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: unusually friendly
Other: it appears that though people are rated based on their pictures, one doesn't need to be approved to become a member and rate people
Verdict: less petty than the other ratings communities, but in the end its still just a giant exercise in vanity. lame (D+).
Case # 8 - rate_my_face
Categories: appearance rating
Entries per month: 5.17
Comments per entry: 1.9
Members: 54 (+3.00 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: strangely uncommunicative. There's just the pictures and the numbers (ratings).
Other: Not even the user info says much. These people aren't into talking I guess
Case # 9 - schoolofblog
Entries per month: 0.61
Comments per entry: 6.55
Members: 16 (+0.89 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: ingenius
Verdict: awesome (A). Existant members should be given PhDs in blogology and the rest of you should study their writings.
Case # 10 - mymomreadsmylj
Entries per month: 0.09
Comments per entry: 1.00
Members: 1 (+0.09 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: sheer unbelievable terror
Other: This community is for griping about the fact that your mother reads your lj, your suspicions that she does, or your incredible fear of the possibility. (or I suppose "mother" in the above can be substituted by "father," "parole officer," or "vampire overlord," etc.) -"About"
Verdict: operating significantly below potential. Its potential constituents either don't know about it or perhaps are too terrified to join and potentially alert their mothers that they know.
Case # 11 - we_miss_u_fittz
Categories: special interest, Fittzian
Entries per month: .33
Comments per entry: .25
Members: 5 (+0.42 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: Missing
Other: the undead souls of missfittz and apoplecticfittz continue to blog on!
Case # 12 - fitz_is_stupid
Categories: special interest, Fittzian
Entries per month: 5.3
Comments per entry: 11.9
Members: 190 (+6.13 / month)
Mentality exhibited by members in posts and comments: dislike for apoplecticfittz.
So I just created this community. "About" info currently reads:
There are tens of thousands of livejournal communities, probably 90% of which are rating communities, but there's no community that rates communities.
When dozens of existant communities are dedicated to the same purpose, how do you know which one is the best to get involved in?
If you're hankering to get yourself rated somewhere, it may as well be by a community credentialed as worthwhile. Literally thousands of ratings communities claim to be the best, the most worthy, but does that have any value at all if they're never compared on a whole to other groups?
Or you got rejected and now you claim that community was full of shit anyway. Just sour grapes or an epic truth? Time for an independant investigation.. here!
General plan is either the moderators will find communities they feel like rating, members of communities will fill out an application to be rated, or people will submit requests for review of communities they might not be in (perhaps were rejected, want revenge).
Rated journals (good or bad) will be listed somewhere (user info, memories? haven't decided yet) and categorized by type.
High rating of a submitted community will not result in the applicant being accepted as a "member" of this community. The purpose of this community is not to form an "elite" membership, it is to categorize communities.
The "members" shall be the judges. Our credentials as legitimate source depend upon "democratic" governance of the community. As such new members will be chosen by a majority of the current members based entirely on their perceived qualifications as a judge and the usefulness of having new judges at that time (again, membership is not intended to convey some sort of elite status). Controlling institutional aspects of the community, such as its bylaws (which at this time are what you are currently reading) will be changeably by a 2/3rds vote of the members. I believe this sets us apart from most communities, where what the founder says goes.