Expert: Katie - 12/2/2006

Question
Hi Katie,
Thanks for your response. I note that you had to jump down past the first five experts in this category to identify one who merits consideration as valid. Moreover, the former leader, whose expertise was in bondage and sadomasochism, apparently has dropped below the first 25 positions in a matter of a day or so. Is that because he failed to respond as quickly to his seventh question in 3 months as he had to the first 6? If so that makes my point about the statical unreliability of the criterion of only 5 questions in 3 months.
May I ask a question as to how the "response time" is calculated? Does the clock start to run at the moment the question is posted, or does it start when the expert first becomes aware of the subject of it, or is it when he downloads the text and requests a response box?
The answer to that might help me to understand what is the reason for the strange results that are posted.
I hope that you will understand that I am not trying to be difficult or obstinate about this, but rather that I am so supportive of the program that I am concerned as to what appears to be a tainted recognition category that affects all of us who participate as volunteers.
Roland Finston

-------------------------------------------
The text above is a follow-up to ...

-----Question-----
Hi Katie,
Everything is going great except I still believe that to be considered for expert recognition based on "shortest average response time" that the minimum number of questions in a 3 month period has to be raised to something like 45. If you look at the present 'top 25  ratings', there are 19 people who have answered less than 30 questions (as few as 5, average 12), and 6 who have answered between 130 and 931 questions. Those with under 30 questions are for the most part people who have obscure categories and have only had a few questioners, most appear to be duplicate from one questioner or friends trying out the service for fun. These are not serious "experts" yet, and maybe someday they will be. But I believe that the recognition should be saved for the experts like the 6 and others who are hard at it, putting in the time to help others day in and day out. To do otherwise is a mockery of their efforts.
Thanks for your consideration.
Roland Finston, Chrysler Repair
PS: I've answered over 3500 questions in 2 years.
-----Answer-----
Hi, Roland.

I see your point. At the same time, however, I do not want to penalize volunteers for belonging to "obscure" topics.

Experts in the mainstream categories already have an unfair advantage when it comes to the Volunteer of the Month Nominations - you will always have more opportunities to prove yourself. For example: more people ride cars instead of mules nowadays, but that does not mean that Sue King (Top 6) is any less dedicated to helping questioners. In fact, her ratings and the speed with which she gets back to them shows that she is!

I believe that applies to all the other volunteers on that list as well, but if you know of one or more who are on that list because their friends asked them empty questions, then please send that info to experts@about.com so we can investigate as soon as possible.

Thanks for Volunteering,
Katie
AllExperts.com  

Answer
I could have chosen from the top 5, but it was easier (and less risque) to make the riding analogy with Mules instead of BDSM.

The clock starts as soon as the question is asked.

Roland, since you are one of our top experts and it's apparent that you have given this far more consideration  than I have, I will ask our development  team to raise the minimum number of questions for that award to 45.

Hope this helps and
thanks for volunteering,
Katie
AllExperts.com