|
Phlegmish posted:[turning to goon sitting next to me in the audience] the gently caress is NPS Okay, so Imagine that someone asked you "how likely, on a scale of 1 to 10, are you to recommend this business to someone else?" You give your answer, they note it down. If you gave them a 6 or lower, you're a Detractor and probably going to poo poo-talk them. If you gave them a 9 or 10, you're a Promoter and probably actively saying positives. Otherwise you're neutral. Total up all the promoters, subtract all the detractors, divide by the total number of people you asked, multiply the result by 100, and that's your Net Promoter Score, a percentile grade for How Good You Is. It's technically a proprietary system but it's so fuckin' basic bitch obvious that it's functionally public domain at this point. For example, if you survey 20 people, get back 10 Promoters, 6 Detractors and 4 Neutrals, you have an NPS of 20 ((10 - 6) / 20) * 100). You'll notice that it always gives a number between -100 and 100 so metrics geeks cream their pants about how easy it is to plot over time, and a lot of senior management types like it because it's a single, simple, holistic number they can look at and assign targets to, that the business can inevitably fail to meet because the score's swingy as gently caress and early gains decay like hell over time as the new product smell wears off and people get used to your system being a default. Source: The company I work for is ten years old and senior management set an NPS score goal of 35 after the statistics guys manged to fluff a 30 out of a carefully selected group of customers. Somfin has a new favorite as of 14:16 on Apr 7, 2019 |
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
Furia posted:This escalated quickly Yeah, I really hate NPS. I’ve seen it do a lot of damage to companies, teams, and people, and earlier in my career I was complicit in managing to NPS as a metric I didn’t take the time to look at critically. I am trying to atone. I have multiple researchers in my division working on better ways to track word-of-mouth impact because I don’t want NPS to surface in our product even though our customers use it themselves and ask about it. The Cheshire Cat posted:It's really not a thing that's useful as a one-off data point. The thing about those scales is they CAN be used over time to measure trends in an individual - if someone rates their pain as a 5 when they first come in but later rates it as a 7, you know something has gotten worse because their own subjective experience has changed, even if you don't really have any sense for how bad a "5" or a "7" actually is. Yes, NPS is quite limited in telling you about many important changes in the underlying data, so it’s not really that useful in tracking changes over time in an actionable way!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Stolen from the Pokemon thread:
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:[turning to goon sitting next to me in the audience] the gently caress is NPS Neopets Score. Some companies are taking gamification way too far it turns out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Yeah, I really hate NPS. I’ve seen it do a lot of damage to companies, teams, and people, and earlier in my career I was complicit in managing to NPS as a metric I didn’t take the time to look at critically. I am trying to atone. I have multiple researchers in my division working on better ways to track word-of-mouth impact because I don’t want NPS to surface in our product even though our customers use it themselves and ask about it. My company just adopted NPS, gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 18:10
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:My company just adopted NPS, gently caress. YCMPOS
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Stolen from the Pokemon thread: Kingler is a small sample size legend. Boban Marjanovic rear end crab.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2019 23:29
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Stolen from the Pokemon thread: Extra  about this one: All of the numbers I've checked on here are wrong. Even if you're as generous as possible butterfree only got 5 wins, and Kingler is missing one of its three fights, so it should be 5/7. Snorlax is also missing a bunch of matches and should be lower etc etc
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nihilistspicer/status/1115638220904120321
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 05:47
|
|
|
I hate rating scales, from 1-10 "8 is average" corporate scales to product review 5-star scales, just every rating scale is bullshit because people are poo poo at them. No, I'm not going to go through my music library being all "well, I like this song, but about half a point less than this other song I also like" like some dweeb. Spotify got it right by not having rating scales. You put a checkmark on the songs you like, and that's it. Nobody cares where you rate it on a 5-point scale. Similarly, Facebook removed the stupid star ratings and now they just ask you whether you would recommend a page or not, and you can put a mini-review. That's how to do it. /rant
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 09:36
|
|
|
I hear they tried to turn the thread rating system into a gold/poo poo only system but editing the five-point scale in any way causes the forums to explode and Lowtax to suffer a seizure
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 13:08
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I hear they tried to turn the thread rating system into a gold/poo poo only system but editing the five-point scale in any way causes the forums to explode and Lowtax to suffer a seizure 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 13:28
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I hear they tried to turn the thread rating system into a gold/poo poo only system but editing the five-point scale in any way causes the forums to explode and Lowtax to suffer a seizure I realized I've never rated anything other than 1 or 5 so I rated this thread 4
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 13:41
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Similarly, Facebook removed the stupid star ratings and now they just ask you whether you would recommend a page or not, and you can put a mini-review. That's how to do it. This was an enormous fight between people who confused precision with accuracy (most PMs and about half the engineers) and those who wanted to optimize participation and clarity (UX, a couple rogue PMs, half the engineers, every single data scientist who even brushed up against it). I'm glad that the good guys won. The Economist revisits some dataviz goofs: https://medium.economist.com/mistakes-weve-drawn-a-few-8cdd8a42d368
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 14:05
|
|
|
Great way to anger your dog-loving friends: https://twitter.com/StefSimanowitz/status/1115901865156403200 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
Bulldogs are pretty garbage as dogs. But all dogs are great. I kinda wish there was a way of establishing the dumb/smart dimension better but unless they did something weird like rotate the dogs (not just flip it vertically) it'd be hard to convey. As a dachshund owner I'm good with this chart (they're not that smart but they are awesome).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
Cats #1
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:30
|
|
Tater Love 
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Great way to anger your dog-loving friends: Lmao at the cat (in the "Hot Dogs!" area by the papillon) Also how the gently caress are they correct about bulldogs but wrong about pugs (they are dumb and trash and I love them) DarkHorse has a new favorite as of 17:34 on Apr 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
zakharov posted:Cats #1 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Great way to anger your dog-loving friends: Decided to fix this garbage graph e: someone with twitter please tweet this at him 
Son of Thunderbeast has a new favorite as of 20:48 on Apr 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:Lmao at the cat (in the "Hot Dogs!" area by the papillon) Bulldogs are Good Boys and all the health problems they have are not their fault. Don't know why they rate border collies so high, they are the most neurotic fuckers around. Edit: ^^^ Yeah that's much better. Hobnob has a new favorite as of 17:45 on Apr 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
zakharov posted:Cats #1 There is a cat on that chart, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 18:19
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:Lmao at the cat (in the "Hot Dogs!" area by the papillon) I have a pug, and despite about a year's worth of observation I still can't figure out if he's dumb as a brick or just intransigent. Possibly both. In summation, pugs are the cats of dogs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Chitin posted:I have a pug, and despite about a year's worth of observation I still can't figure out if he's dumb as a brick or just intransigent. Possibly both. Not if you have to take them out to pee and poo they're not. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:There is a cat on that chart, too. Cats are apparently the fifth-best kind of dog, according to their data.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Tenebrais posted:Cats are apparently the fifth-best kind of dog, according to their data. And yet way less popular than scads of breeds of dogs, something about that data point 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
Piell posted:I realized I've never rated anything other than 1 or 5 so I rated this thread 4 I forgot you could rate threads until just now. I never rate threads, I guess. Edit: voted 4
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
i rate threads i like 1, because they're number 1!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 00:45
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:The Economist revisits some dataviz goofs:  This change is stupid because we shouldn’t expect size and mass to have a proportional relationship. We should expect mass should scale with the cube of neck size. The new neck size is 0.955× the old neck size, so the mass should be 0.9553 × 20.5 kg = 17.8 kg. That’s close enough to what we see on the graph. Dogs aren’t radically changing shape. They’re simply shrinking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
The first graph kind of implied a weird as poo poo shapeshift because the lines were crossing
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 05:43
|
|
|
Yeah the author's explanation on that one was muddled. They measures SHOULD be extremely correlated, even before you account for the length/volume scaling (and moreso after). And they are. But that correlation is also trivial/uninteresting, the dimensionality thing is trivial/uninteresting, and the appearance of an interaction can be confusing. So I'd separate the lines but NOT change the scales (just move one up to separate the lines). Or just pick weight and leave the neck size off the chart. But it's all pretty small beer I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 15:41
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Great way to anger your dog-loving friends: Excuse me, beagles aren't dumb, they just have a different priority than you. Namely, food.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 16:22
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Excuse me, beagles aren't dumb, they just have a different priority than you. Namely, food. or escaping, so they can get more food
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 16:35
|
|
|
Armacham posted:or escaping, so they can get more food Or shooting down the Red Baron in their Sopwith Camel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
Yeah, a border collie is a good dog, if you dedicate 15% of your day to keeping that dog busy as hell
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Excuse me, beagles aren't dumb, they just have a different priority than you. Namely, food. I think you’ll find that food is pretty much my highest priority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
I wonder the extent to which breeding beagles to have good senses of smell was in practice breeding dogs who are super hungry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:I think you’ll find that food is pretty much my highest priority. Coincidentally someone posted this in the funny pics thread: That's a top-right corner dog right there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
Dogs are all annoying and dumb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Dogs are all annoying and dumb. thanks for visiting the something awful dot com forums, mr. president
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 00:07
|
|
