Karma as described by Turbulent is the cumulative number of Upvotes. Postcount as described by Turbulent is the cumulative number of Posts including the old Posts from the old Forum. Check this in AtV: https://youtu.be/IY6Ju2UR0hA?t=694 However Karma, as described by Wikipedia, recapped in a very condensed way, is basically the sum of all consequences in relation to your actions. So it cannot stand alone as a number without any reference or relation to the source. A formula like "Poster Score = Upvotes / New Posts without old Posts" and the postcount from the old forum mentioned separately makes more sense. With this ratio you can find people worthy to be followed based on their overall "helpfullness" or "funnyness" or "popularity" even though they don't have many Posts. In this Example let's look only at the Data from Spectrum - not from the old Forums: Poster "A" has 400 Posts and 100 Upvotes. Poster "B" has 20 Posts and 10 Upvotes. Poster "C" has 60 Posts and 75 Upvotes. On the first glance Poster "A" is more "Liked" and more "Experienced", however if you look at the Upvotes/Postcount Ratio it looks different: Poster "A" with 100 Upvotes gets it from his 400 Posts, so his score is 100/400 = 0.25 Poster "B" with 10 Upvotes gets it from his 20 Posts, so his score is 10/20 = 0.5 Poster "C" with 75 Upvotes gets it from his 60 Posts, so his score is 75/60 = 1.25 If you want to display the rating as stars, the highest ratio would define the mark for 5/5 stars and all others could be distributed below. A=*.... B=**... C=***** So with that Rating I am more likely to follow poster "C". With that Rating it would also be more easy for CIG to find MVP's (Most Valuable Posters). Additionally with the postcount from the old Forum you can determine the Forum Veteran Status of a poster.