知識長燉冬菇

2010-02-18 12:49 am
根據現行Yahoo!知識+制度,假設沒有管理員移除問題干預下,

一個知識長戶口能降至的級別有那些?

不能降至的級別有那些?

請詳盡解釋。

回答 (4)

2010-02-26 1:58 am
✔ 最佳答案
假設沒有管理員移除問題干預下, 仲有其他 scenario:

Scenario 1: 知識長唔再答問題, 即係唔會再被選為最佳答案 or not, 唔會影響到採用率.
咁呢個知識長嘅降級就取決於佢嘅最佳解答比人負評(惡意與否則不加評論), 導致扣分. 佢一日有2501分或以上嘅, 因為取決於採用率 (唔變) 同回答數 (唔變), 都仲係知識長. 但當扣分到2500分以下, 就會變成小學級. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5咁落, 到0分以下就變成幼兒級. (詳情請參考知識等級表)
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/info/ranking.html

Scenario 2: 知識長繼續答問題, 但因為任何原因唔被選為最佳解答, 影響到採用率.
當一個知識長答咗2000條題目, 有1400條被選為最佳解答, 採用率 70%. 佢下一條問題(第2001條)冇被採用, 咁採用率 = 1400/2001 = 69.965% = <70%, 會變成博士級1級. 基於2501點以上嘅級數係以回答數及採用率將作為以後升級標準, 而回答數已經肯定超過125條, 所以就算之後呢個知識長答任何問題都唔被選中, 採用率一路下降, 都唔會跌低過中學級.
極端情況下, 被選為最佳解答停留喺1400條, 當佢答到2334題時, 就會跌落碩士級1級; 3501題時就跌落大學級1級; 4667題時就跌落中學級1級. 回答數已經唔會影響到每大級中間嘅1,2,3,4,5分級.

2010-03-04 1:18 am
好像聽說有人被檢舉被刪數百題。
2010-03-04 1:14 am
恕我無甚觸覺,是否真的有管理員移除問題干預下重大變級的情形呢?
制度有規則,管理員移除問題則似乎無劃一標準,移除原因往往籠统,有需要監管這種行為。
2010-02-18 1:11 am
知識長 can be Demoted to:

博士級, 碩士級, 大學級, 中學級 based on 採用率. (In this case, all newly demoted rankings will be remain as 1 級 as the sub-rating because 知識長 has to have 2000 回答數 to qualified.)

知識長 can't be Demoted to:



小學級, 幼兒級 based on 分數範圍 (知識長 has a large pool of points. Unless 知識長 wants to sabotage the rating, it will be so difficult to reduce 知識長's point to less than 2500 points).







2010-02-18 04:14:40 補充:
Yes. All demoted will be level 1 regardless because the level is based on how many questions you have answered and that number is not going to drop.

2010-02-18 16:08:54 補充:
Same as 博士級, 碩士級, 大學級.

2010-02-18 16:23:45 補充:
As I said, all demoted will be remain as Level 1 because of the questions that they have answered. They are demoted because of the 採用率.

Also, 知識長 has a large pool of points. Unless 知識長 wants to sabotage the rating, it will be so difficult to reduce 知識長's point to less than 2500 points

2010-02-18 17:25:20 補充:
Then you need to ask Yahoo!. The reason - those situations rarely come separately.


收錄日期: 2021-04-11 01:22:34
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100217000051KK00856

檢視 Wayback Machine 備份