{"id":36116,"date":"2019-10-31T22:09:42","date_gmt":"2019-10-31T19:09:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/blog\/mehaniki-gejmifikatsii-rejting\/"},"modified":"2019-10-31T22:09:42","modified_gmt":"2019-10-31T19:09:42","slug":"mehaniki-gejmifikatsii-rejting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/blog\/news\/mehaniki-gejmifikatsii-rejting","title":{"rendered":"Gamification Mechanics: Ranking","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"

Rating. What is it and how to use it in gamification? The question seems simple, even rhetorical, but in reality, even such an obvious mechanism has many nuances, including those stemming from human evolution.<\/p>\n

\"Gamification
\n<\/a><\/noindex>
\nThis article is the first in my series on components, mechanics, and interesting examples of gamification. Therefore, I will provide brief definitions for some general terms. What is 'gamification'? Wikipedia defines it as: 'the application of elements typical of computer games in non-gaming processes in order to engage users and consumers, increase their involvement in solving practical tasks, and utilizing products and services.' <\/p>\n

I prefer a different definition: 'gamification is managing user behavior in a system through game mechanics.' The difference between these definitions is that the system can be a website or software, as well as a public park or transportation network. Gamification is applicable not only in the IT sphere. Furthermore, some game mechanics are used to increase user engagement, while others aim to attract users, but this combines into the overarching concept of 'behavior management.' To implement gamification, it is important to know what users in the system do (or could do if the system is not yet in use) and what users should do from the perspective of the system owners. Gamification is beneficial for transitioning from 'what they do' to 'what they should do.' <\/p>\n

\"Gamification
\nRating is a simple and popular game mechanic used in gamification. There is no exact definition of the term 'game mechanic'; sometimes it can refer to anything from badges and achievements to behavioral prompts. Clarifying the terminology used in gamification is a topic for a separate article; here, I will limit myself to a brief explanation of what I mean by game mechanics. It is the lowest (most specific) level of designing a gamified system, the equivalent of building blocks in a Lego set. Game mechanics are chosen and applied when the higher, more abstract levels of gamification have already been thought through. Therefore, ratings, badges, and levels are game mechanics, while viral aspects or teamwork are not. <\/p>\n

Rating is a numerical or ordinal indicator that reflects the importance or significance of a specific object or phenomenon (definition from Wikipedia). The rating mechanic is related to the scoring mechanic and often to the user level mechanic. A rating without points is impossible; the system will not understand the order in which to display users in the rating, while a rating without levels is possible.<\/p>\n

Let's try to classify ratings based on their significance for system users. <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Competitive \u2014 encourages users to rank higher than other users. The most frequently encountered type of rating.<\/li>\n
  2. Defining a losing situation \u2014 the system imposes a penalty if a specified number of rating points are not accumulated. Possible penalty options include demotion to a previous rating group, reduction of rank, loss in competition, deduction of some game currency, or a moral penalty (shame board). This is used less often than the winning situation counterpart, requires careful consideration before implementation, and analysis of user behavior, because penalties have a significantly negative impact on users and can greatly diminish motivation.<\/li>\n
  3. Defining a winning situation grants the right to rewards for achieving a specified number of ranking points. Rewards are given for top positions in the ranking and for intermediate stages. The rewards align with the same options used for penalties in losing situations, but with a positive sign. Rewards for intermediate ranking stages are an interesting but rare practice that allows users to maintain their motivation while transitioning from one level to another. For example, the ranking of the old ChefMarket version. This is a home delivery service for groceries with recipes for homemade cooking. Each client in their personal account sees their status, earns points for prepared dishes, and these points translate to levels. However, achieving the next level requires preparing dozens of dishes, which can be demotivating. Gifts for every X points (the number of points depends on the current customer level) help soften this demotivating effect. \"Gamification
    \nChefMarket user ranking. Note how seamlessly other game mechanics are utilized: badges, progress bars, titles, all wrapped in an aesthetically pleasing interface.<\/i><\/li>\n
  4. Status ranking \u2014 enhances the authority of high-ranking users in the eyes of others. This is used, for example, in online question projects (StackOverflow, Answers@Mail.Ru). MMR systems (player matchmaking ratings) in MOBA games can also be classified as status rankings.<\/li>\n
  5. Trust ranking \u2014 increases trust in high-ranking users among others. It has become standard for online auctions. User karma on Habra is another example of a trust ranking. Trust rankings are employed in systems based on user interactions, especially when this interaction occurs offline or entails the exchange of services and goods. \"Gamification
    \nAn example of an online auction ranking with badges awarded upon reaching certain ranking levels.<\/i><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    \nThe rankings from the list above are combined in various ways within the system. In theory, a competitive user ranking is possible, with intermediate winning situations, penalties for ranking outsiders, and a high level of status and trust for ranking leaders.<\/p>\n

    Another way to classify ratings is by who changes a user's rating \u2014 only the system, only other users, or both the system and users. The option where only the system alters a user's rating is the most common. It is often used in online games. Players perform various actions (like defeating monsters, completing quests), for which the system awards experience points (rating). Other users do not affect the player's rating in such a system. The scenario in which a user's rating is modified by other users rather than the system is typically employed alongside a trust rating. Examples include increasing or decreasing karma and positive or negative feedback after transactions on marketplaces. A combined option is also possible, as seen in online Q&A platforms. For answering a question, a user automatically receives rating points from the system, and if other users deem the answer as the best, the user gets additional points. <\/p>\n

    The next method is based on positive and negative changes to a user's rating. I distinguish between conditional 'rating plus,' 'rating plus-minus positive,' 'rating plus-minus negative,' and 'rating minus.' The first option, 'rating plus,' implies solely an increase in the user's rating. This method is used, for instance, by buyers on the eBay auction platform. Following a transaction, the seller leaves the buyer either a positive review or opts not to leave one at all. Yes, a fraudulent buyer can be blocked by the administration, but their rating cannot decrease (unless they start selling poorly themselves).<\/p>\n

    'Rating plus-minus positive' entails both increases and decreases in the user's rating, while ensuring that the rating does not fall below zero. This type of rating prevents a user from sinking too deep in case of unfavorable actions (and experiencing the wrath of Habr). However, a new user and a user whose rating fluctuates around the zero mark due to systematic 'bad' actions will appear the same visually, which negatively impacts trust in the entire system.<\/p>\n

    A plus-minus rating means that the user's rating can both increase and decrease to any values. In practice, there is no point in having a large negative rating, and it is recommended to establish a threshold negative value in the system, after which punitive measures against such a user should be taken, up to account blocking. It is also important to consider the situation where other users intentionally 'leak' ratings, and to eliminate or make this possibility difficult. <\/p>\n

    \"Gamification
    \nA minus rating is a rarely used mechanism where the initial user's rating may either remain unchanged or decrease. I can't immediately recall projects that utilize such a mechanism, but theoretically it is possible. For instance, it could be applicable to projects or games based on elimination or 'last heroes.' <\/p>\n

    When using a rating mechanism, one must avoid a critical mistake: the gaps in the number of points scored between users in the system (or between user levels) should not be demotivating or unattainable. Such differences significantly demotivate new users, who see they have zero points while the rating leader has millions. Why does this happen, and why might a new user feel that catching up with the leader is impossible? Firstly, new users haven\u2019t spent enough time in the system to understand the dynamics of point accumulation. Two to three million points held by the leader may not seem so unachievable if the system awards thousands of points for each user action. The problem is that a demotivated new user stops using the system before they grasp this. Secondly, the issue lies in our natural logarithmic perception of the numerical series. <\/p>\n

    We are accustomed to living among the linear ordering of numbers. House numbering, roulette, rulers, graphs, and clocks\u2014all have numbers arranged along the number line at equal intervals. It is obvious to us that the difference between 1 and 5 is the same as between 5 and 10. The same difference exists between 1,500,000 and 1,500,505. In reality, the linear ordering of numbers is a result of cultural influence rather than an innate ability. Our distant ancestors, who lived tens of thousands of years ago, lacked modern mathematical tools and perceived numbers logarithmically. In other words, they arranged them on the number line more densely as they increased. They did not perceive numbers in terms of exact values but rather approximately. This was necessary for their way of life. When encountering enemies, it was crucial to quickly estimate, albeit roughly, who had the greater numbers\u2014friends or foes. The choice of which tree to harvest fruit from was also based on rough estimation. Our ancestors did not calculate exact values. A logarithmic scale also takes into account the laws of perspective and our perception of distance. For example, when we look at a tree that is one hundred meters away and another tree that is one hundred meters behind the first, the second hundred meters seem shorter. <\/p>\n

    \"Gamification
    \nThe player with white pieces in this image does not need to know the exact number of black pieces to realize that his situation is dire.<\/i><\/p>\n

    More about logarithmic perception of numbers, the studies supporting this theory, and other fascinating facts from the world of mathematics can be found in the popular science book by Alex Bellos, 'Alex in Numberland: Never-Ending Adventures in the World of Mathematics.' <\/p>\n

    The logarithmic perception of numbers at an intuitive level has been inherited by us. Hidden beneath cultural layers, it manifests, for example, in the sense of time (in childhood, years passed slowly, but now they just fly by). Despite all our education, we still get lost when confronted with very large numbers and instinctively switch to their logarithmic perception. We understand the difference between one liter and two liters of beer, but ten billion and a hundred billion liters of beer seem to us to be roughly the same numbers, fitting into the concept of 'a very, very large amount of beer.' This is why the sense of unattainability of rankings arises when the gap between the current position and the leader consists of 'a very, very large' number of points. The user's brain will not intuitively analyze the situation, study the dynamics of point accumulation, or calculate the time to reach the top of the ranking. They will simply render the verdict \u2014 'that's too much; it's not worth the effort.' <\/p>\n

    To avoid the situations described above, a floating dynamic of point accumulation for the ranking should be applied, where users receive rewards and accumulate ranking points faster at the start of the anticipated lifecycle of using the system than in the middle and end. An example is World of Warcraft and similar MMORPGs with a 'European' (rather than 'Korean') character leveling system. The conditional European leveling system implies a fast progression through the initial levels of the game, followed by a gradual slowdown. The system used in typical Korean (and other Asian) games entails a sharp slowdown in the speed of gaining the last levels of a character.<\/p>\n

    For instance, in Lineage 2, reaching level 74 requires gaining 500,000 experience points, for level 75 \u2014 560,000, for level 76 \u2014 623,000, for level 77 it\u2019s significantly more \u2014 1,175,000, while transitioning from level 84 to the maximum level 85 requires gaining 270 million experience points, with the speed of gaining experience remaining almost unchanged (the entire experience and levels table in Lineage 2 is available at this link<\/a><\/noindex>). This slowdown appears excessive in gamification as it overly demotivates users. <\/p>\n

    \"Gamification
    \nAnother point to remember is that it's easier for a user to abandon a game or gamified system at the beginning, and harder when they have spent a lot of time in the system. After accumulating points, levels, and items, a user is less likely to want to give them up. Therefore, let's give new users a temporary bonus to earned points, for example, +50% for a month. This bonus will serve as an additional incentive to use the system. During the period of the bonus, the user will appreciate the speed of point accumulation, get accustomed to it, and is more likely to continue using the system.<\/p>\n

    An example of a demotivating gap in the ranking is the Gett Taxi app. Before the last update in its loyalty program, there were twenty levels, with 6000 points required for the maximum level (an average of 20-30 points was given per ride). All twenty levels were evenly distributed across a scale from 0 to 6000, in approximate accordance with the European leveling system in online games. After the update, three more levels were added to the app, requiring 10,000, 20,000, and 40,000 points respectively, which is closer to the Korean system (considering that the number of points earned per ride did not change). I do not have a representative sample of user opinions about this update, but eighteen of my friends and colleagues who use Gett Taxi noted the demotivating effect of the new ranking levels. None of them have achieved any new levels since the update (more than a year ago). <\/p>\n

    \"Gamification
    \nThe gap between the three new and previous levels in the Gett Taxi loyalty program is unjustifiably large and demotivating.<\/i><\/p>\n

    To avoid a demotivating gap in the ranking, it is necessary to add local rankings in addition to the global ranking, where the gaps between positions will not be so large. <\/p>\n

    Possible ways to divide the global ranking into local rankings:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Among friends. It shows a ranking consisting only of the user's friends. People enjoy competing not with an unknown opponent, whose only identity is a nickname (such an opponent is hardly different from a bot), but with friends and acquaintances.<\/li>\n
    2. By time. A rating accumulated over a specific period (day, week, month, year). Good for resetting and replayability. Didn't win this week\u2014I'll try again next week, and the gap between users is regularly reset and doesn't grow to astronomical values.<\/li>\n
    3. By geotargeting. A rating that only shows users from a specific area (district, city, country, continent). In such a situation, Gaius Julius Caesar once said, passing through a poor barbarian town: \"Better to be first here than second in Rome.\"<\/li>\n
    4. By gender. Then compare the results of men and women, playing on trending feminist and chauvinist themes (use with caution, potential streams of hatred and backlash from both sides).<\/li>\n
    5. By age groups. For example, in gamification of systems related to sports where skills change with age. For instance, projects motivating people to engage in sports, allowing them to upload their results and see those of other users. Clearly, it will be much more challenging for a 65-year-old to run the same distance as a 20-year-old, and competing with peers will be much more interesting. An example from another perspective\u2014online chess and other complex intellectual games, where an experienced grandmaster will be unattainable for a fourteen-year-old.<\/li>\n
    6. By other user data available in the system (rating only for Mercedes drivers, only for plumbers, only for the legal department, only for level 120 elves).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      \nFeel free to combine the methods listed above with each other; don\u2019t hesitate to experiment with them. <\/p>\n

      During the operation of a gamified system, monitor how well the rating aligns with the goals set during the design phase. For example, if the goal of the rating was to increase the trust of other users in high-rated users, pay attention to identifying and limiting possible fair and unfair ways to quickly boost ratings. The foundation of a trustworthy rating is the difficulty in obtaining it and the possibility of quickly losing it. If there are loopholes in the system that allow for unjustifiably rapid rating increases, user trust in it will sharply decline. For instance, if an online auction allows sellers\u2019 ratings to be raised for every transaction with each user, two users could maintain their ratings at a high level simply by buying inexpensive items (ideally digital) from each other. Meanwhile, possible negative reviews regarding poor service or fraud would be buried under a mass of fake positive reviews, resulting in a risk of widespread loss of trust in the system. <\/p>\n

      In conclusion, here are three more tips on utilizing ratings and levels:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Do not show the user the number of points needed for subsequent levels. This demoralizes newcomers who are not yet familiar with the pace of scoring in the system and the points-earning possibilities. When a user sees that the first level is achieved with 10 points, the second with 20, and the twentieth already requires one hundred thousand, it can be demotivating. One hundred thousand seems like an unreachable number.<\/li>\n
      2. Show the points needed to reach the next level based on points already earned. The user has earned 10 points, moved to the second level, and now needs 20 points to reach the third level. Instead of displaying the user's progress as 0 out of 20, show it as 10 out of 30. Create the illusion of an unfinished task; our brains do not like unfinished tasks and strive to complete them. This is how progress bar mechanics work, and this principle applies in our case as well. Logarithmic thinking is also beneficial here. When we see we've scored 450 out of 500 experience points, it feels like this task is almost complete.<\/li>\n
      3. Remind users of their achievements in various system ratings (after all, the user might not even realize that this week they are in the top three among men in their area).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        \nIn this article, I do not claim to provide a comprehensive analysis of potential applications of ranking mechanics, so I may have overlooked some cases and use cases. If you have interesting experiences with rankings in games and gamified systems, please share them with me and other readers.
        \n
        Source:         habr.com<\/a><\/p>","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        \u0420\u0435\u0439\u0442\u0438\u043d\u0433. \u0427\u0442\u043e \u044d\u0442\u043e \u0438 \u043a\u0430\u043a \u0435\u0433\u043e \u0438\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u044c\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u0433\u0435\u0439\u043c\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438? \u0412\u043e\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441 \u043a\u0430\u0436\u0435\u0442\u0441\u044f \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441\u0442\u044b\u043c, \u0434\u0430\u0436\u0435 \u0440\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0440\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u043a\u0438\u043c, \u043d\u043e \u043d\u0430 \u0434\u0435\u043b\u0435 \u0438 \u0443 \u0442\u0430\u043a\u043e\u0439 \u043e\u0447\u0435\u0432\u0438\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u043c\u0435\u0445\u0430\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u0435\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043c\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043d\u044e\u0430\u043d\u0441\u043e\u0432, \u0432 \u0442\u043e\u043c \u0447\u0438\u0441\u043b\u0435, \u043e\u0431\u0443\u0441\u043b\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u044d\u0432\u043e\u043b\u044e\u0446\u0438\u0435\u0439 \u0447\u0435\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0435\u043a\u0430. \u042d\u0442\u0430 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u044c\u044f \u2014 \u043f\u0435\u0440\u0432\u0430\u044f \u0438\u0437 \u043c\u043e\u0435\u0433\u043e \u0446\u0438\u043a\u043b\u0430 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0435\u0439 \u043e \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u043e\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430\u0445, \u043c\u0435\u0445\u0430\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0445 \u0438 \u0438\u043d\u0442\u0435\u0440\u0435\u0441\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u0430\u0445 \u0433\u0435\u0439\u043c\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438. \u041f\u043e\u044d\u0442\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u043d\u0435\u043a\u043e\u0442\u043e\u0440\u044b\u043c \u043e\u0431\u0449\u0438\u043c \u0442\u0435\u0440\u043c\u0438\u043d\u0430\u043c \u044f \u0431\u0443\u0434\u0443 \u0434\u0430\u0432\u0430\u0442\u044c \u043a\u0440\u0430\u0442\u043a\u0438\u0435 \u043e\u043f\u0440\u0435\u0434\u0435\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"author":1,"featured_media":27009,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[702],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-36116","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\n","aioseo_head_json":{"title":"\ud83e\udd47Gamification Mechanics: Rating | ProHoster","description":"Rating. What is it and how to use it in gamification?","canonical_url":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/blog\/news\/mehaniki-gejmifikatsii-rejting","robots":"max-image-preview:large","keywords":"","webmasterTools":{"miscellaneous":""},"schema":null,"og:locale":"en_US","og:site_name":"ProHoster | \u041a\u0443\u043f\u0438\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0430\u0434\u0435\u0436\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u0445\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438\u043d\u0433 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0441\u0430\u0439\u0442\u043e\u0432 \u0441 \u0437\u0430\u0449\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0439 \u043e\u0442 DDoS, VPS VDS \u0441\u0435\u0440\u0432\u0435\u0440\u044b","og:type":"article","og:title":"\ud83e\udd47\u041c\u0435\u0445\u0430\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438 \u0433\u0435\u0439\u043c\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438: \u0440\u0435\u0439\u0442\u0438\u043d\u0433 | ProHoster","og:description":"\u0420\u0435\u0439\u0442\u0438\u043d\u0433. \u0427\u0442\u043e \u044d\u0442\u043e \u0438 \u043a\u0430\u043a \u0435\u0433\u043e \u0438\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u044c\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0442\u044c \u0432 \u0433\u0435\u0439\u043c\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438?","og:url":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/blog\/news\/mehaniki-gejmifikatsii-rejting","og:image":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/logo-350.jpg","og:image:secure_url":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/logo-350.jpg","og:image:width":350,"og:image:height":350,"article:published_time":"2019-10-31T19:09:42+00:00","article:modified_time":"2019-10-31T19:09:42+00:00","article:publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/prohoster","article:author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/prohoster"},"aioseo_meta_data":{"post_id":"36116","title":null,"description":null,"keywords":null,"keyphrases":null,"primary_term":null,"canonical_url":null,"og_title":null,"og_description":null,"og_object_type":"default","og_image_type":"default","og_image_url":null,"og_image_width":null,"og_image_height":null,"og_image_custom_url":null,"og_image_custom_fields":null,"og_video":null,"og_custom_url":null,"og_article_section":null,"og_article_tags":null,"twitter_use_og":false,"twitter_card":"default","twitter_image_type":"default","twitter_image_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_fields":null,"twitter_title":null,"twitter_description":null,"schema":{"blockGraphs":[],"customGraphs":[],"default":{"data":{"Article":[],"Course":[],"Dataset":[],"FAQPage":[],"Movie":[],"Person":[],"Product":[],"ProductReview":[],"Car":[],"Recipe":[],"Service":[],"SoftwareApplication":[],"WebPage":[]},"graphName":"","isEnabled":true},"graphs":[]},"schema_type":null,"schema_type_options":null,"pillar_content":false,"robots_default":true,"robots_noindex":false,"robots_noarchive":false,"robots_nosnippet":false,"robots_nofollow":false,"robots_noimageindex":false,"robots_noodp":false,"robots_notranslate":false,"robots_max_snippet":null,"robots_max_videopreview":null,"robots_max_imagepreview":"large","priority":null,"frequency":null,"local_seo":null,"seo_analyzer_scan_date":"2026-01-22 02:04:38","breadcrumb_settings":null,"limit_modified_date":false,"reviewed_by":null,"ai":null,"created":"2021-03-01 01:50:24","updated":"2026-01-22 02:04:38","focus_keyword":null,"additional_keywords":null,"truseo_locale":null},"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"link","format":"url"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36116","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36116"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36116\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/27009"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36116"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36116"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}