by Karon Brandt

Created on: May 18, 2009   Last Updated: February 03, 2010

Helium has a unique rating system that boosts rater-evaluated articles - that have met the groups' consensus - into public view. The democratic, proprietary system is the best and fairest that Helium has been able to devise since its beginnings in October 2006. The system is based on fairness, neutrality and mathematical algorithms.

Helium has one million articles in its article database (around mid October 2009). Articles are written to 125,000 distinct titles, and almost 2,000 new ones are being added daily. Helium's "engine" is its writers who decide what appears best on "their site."

The "test" of a system is in its results. Note, within titles that are rated anonymously, the top-5 consistently show many 4- and 5-starred writers and few no-blue-star-writers are among them. That's consistency. That's "the proof of the pudding."

A system must be practical, reasonable and fair. All writers are readers. Every reader/writer has a "gut feel" for "quality" work. He knows whether it offers him new, worthwhile information - whether it's engaging or entertaining or informative to him - or not.

As part of its writing Community, Helium asks its nearly-250,000 members/writers to judge two anonymous articles side-by-side and decide which is "more relevant" to the topic, which is "better," or which is the "more valuable" to the reader. All writers have preferences, and most of those preferences should flow in one direction and reward the "best" with the most rater "votes." That's group consensus.

Raters will only judge articles from categories they've written to, and they may "skip" any article they want if they feel they aren't too familiar with the topic or simply aren't interested in it.

Helium is gaining a reputation for quality, fact-based articles, which lures other publishers to the site.

Helium's "diamonds-in-the-rough" include its next pool of 5-starred writers. With the never-ending, worldwide, round-the-clock rating system, the "undiscovered writers" have an equal chance of earning top ranks, peer recognition and blue writing stars.

Helium is a self-monitored Community that relies on its members to keep the site up to par: Members/raters/writers report plagiarism, self-promotion, factual errors, substandard works, profanity and adult content.

Helium has culled about 480,000 "ancient," poor-quality articles from its database, and it's automatically deleting the old "post-and-comment" articles under 400 words long. Helium is "raising the bar" on requirements for new content and is constantly asking members to revise, or Helium will remove, off-topic, substandard articles.

The "new" Helium is gaining credibility as a strong competitor for fact-based articles and its reputation is up to its members to uphold.

That takes time and community effort. Every member/writer is asked to rate and and write his/her best, and Helium rewards them on a sliding pay scale. Anyone can self-publish with a byline, but Helium wants to reward loyal, serious-minded writers with upfront pay, dollar bonuses, rating fees, and ongoing page-view earnings.

No system is perfect, but a highly-motivated writing Community that depends on a reputation for quality is going to be performing at its constant-best to survive in a world where other publishers are filing bankruptcy weekly.

Learn more about this author, Karon Brandt.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.