Originally Posted by Spaztic

Actually what I was trying to say is maybe there was some way to specify how much that person did by giving a sort of percentage. Like you have maybe 5 rows, each with two text fields. For each row you put in one box their J2O username and in the other how much they contributed. For instance:

You upload a pack of 3 CTF levels. you made one myself. Bob made another one entirely by himself, and the third was half made by Bob and half by Jim. In the fields I put the following

Bob 49
Jim 16

Bob gets 49 because he made 1 of the 3 levels (33%) and he made 1/2 of another 1 of the 3 levels (33 divided by 2 is 16.5%). 16.5% + 33% is 49.5% and rounded down to 49%.

Jim made 1/2 of 1 of the 3 levels, so he gets 1/2 of 33%, which is 16.5%, rounded down to 16%.

You do not have to specify how much you yourself made because that can be calculated according to the total of above. So 100 - (49 + 16) = 35%. There is of course a margin of error since you are getting 2% extra, but that won't effect your total percentage much.

Now, lets say your average rating is a 6.625 with the following:

8.6
7.5
5.5
4.9

The CTF level pack is uploaded and gets an 8.9. You get 35% of this to help your average. Now is the tricky part, and I'm not sure if this makes sense or anything.

8.6
7.5
5.5
4.9
8.9 (35%)

You add up all the regular whole numbers, and then instead of adding in 8.9, you take 35% of 8.9 and add that in (29.615 is that total). And then, instead of dividing for the average by 5, you take 35% of 1 and add it onto the 4 regular one (4.35 for you geniuses) and use that as a divisor for the total.

29.615 / 4.35 = 6.808

Your average becomes 6.808. It was a 6.625. So logically the higher score of 8.9 increased your rating, but you only got 35% of it so it only increased it very slightly.

I have no idea if this was accurate and haven't really tried to apply it to anything else, but I think it just might work. I really just came up with it on the spot. There are probably errors. Perhaps there is another way to do it. I don't know.

And of course, abuse is still possible. Maybe there could be some sort of validation thing..?