4 and a 1/2 Stars?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=59997
Printed Date: February 22 2025 at 01:03
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: 4 and a 1/2 Stars?
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Subject: 4 and a 1/2 Stars?
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:04
|
See the thread on 4 and 1/2 stars in the "How to improve the site" forum? Personally I find it extremely difficult to make the choice between a Masterpiece and an excellent album - I think the gap is too wide. There are too many 5 stars awarded because a near-perfect album is considered too good for 4 stars, and at the same time 4 stars are given often when an album deserves more. I don't want 3 and 1/2 or 2 and 1/2 etc - just merely a 4 and 1/2..... |
Replies:
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:04
|
Nope. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:07
|
Double nope. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:10
|
Triple note, and a second thread for this discussion, just for the voting facility (which doesn't work in decisions anyway) was not necesarry.
------------- 
|
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:17
| Point taken respectfully (and I guess everybody - avoid discussing this - just vote), but let me ricochet this back to you - the idea for a poll came after the thread had been running a while and I obviously couldn't add it to the other thread |
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:38
|
As the question is formed, no. However, I would like to all the half star ratings come in. Therefore, I abstained from voting. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Rocktopus
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 18:03
|
Yes!
------------- Over land and under ashes In the sunlight, see - it flashes Find a fly and eat his eye But don't believe in me Don't believe in me Don't believe in me |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 18:16
|
Again, it's unnecessary. If you have to question whether or not an album is a five, it isn't a five. It's that simple. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: LiquidEternity
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 18:17
Yeah, I wouldn't mind half-star ratings. Or on a scale of ten, for the fractionally-incompetent.  Maybe we could give the score as a percent? Hehe. How else can we make this more difficult and terrifying for indecisive reviewers?
------------- 
|
Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 18:23
| No, definately not. If you can't really make up your mind, then bloody listen to the record again. I don't want to sound harsh, but it's not really that difficult. Plus, I still think people are underestimating the value of a 4-star rating. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 18:37
Absolutely. In fact, I tend to listen to four star records more often than I do five. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Passionist wrote:Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 21:27
|
Is it necessary? No
Would it make a lot of users, including me, happier? Yes.
I've already explained my reasons in the other thread. ------------- 
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 21:32
|
No. But voted yes just to piss off those on top!!!!!!! |
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 21:42
Ditto.
Though I'll probably vote anyway.  ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 04:12
Yes, OK - so it isn't a 5 - agreed - it's not a 5 - right. (respect  )Errr... so what is it then? |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 04:16
Usually then thing just below a 5... Called a "4". 
-Joel ------------- 
|
Posted By: mono
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 05:20
|
no.... rating have to stay "imprecise" so that the review's value (the text) is conserved. ------------- https://soundcloud.com/why-music Prog trio, from ambiant to violence https://soundcloud.com/m0n0-film Film music and production projects https://soundcloud.com/fadisaliba (almost) everything else |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 05:36
|
I wonder if the staff at Empire magazine and Q complain about their five star rating system all the time? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:39
|
^^
They get payed though  -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:43
 ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:44
Oh, I feel sheepish  - I guess I asked for that!But... I was thinking 4 and 1/2 Aaahh My brain hurts with geekiness  |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:49
|
^^
Hehe, don't feel bad - Just caught in a moment of weakness
4.5 is the whole sort of problem... As in I'd love to have that as an option But With it, I'd end up giving too many albums 4.5
As alot of people have said earlier, if you can't decide on a 5 or a 4, don't give it a 5. -Joel -------------
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:49
|
When you can't decide between 4 and 5, give it a 3. -------------
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:53
How is that logical? -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:53
|
I just roll a six-sided die.
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 06:54
That explains why you love TFTO -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:06
I actually rolled a 20-sided die for that one. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:08
-------------
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:08
  Aww... -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:09
|
See? What'd I tell you?
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:15
|
^^
A whole lot of people must've used this tactic for Pink Floyd albums -------------
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:17
No kidding!Rico and I seem to have this "feud," that anything I love he hates and vice versa. I told him yesterday then that he will loathe The Hazards of Love. I of course write it off as his terrible taste, but what are you gonna do? ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:28
-------------
|
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 07:32
|
Okay, people, back to voting for or against the 1 and 1/2 star...
-------------
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 08:07
|
^
Thats no fun  -------------
|
Posted By: GaryB
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 09:14
| When I research an album to see how it has been rated, I look at the number of ratings. If it is a five and only has two or three ratings that's one thing. But if it's a five and has twenty or more ratings then I know it's worth looking into. |
Posted By: GaryB
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 09:20
|
When I rate albums in my own collection I rate each song with whole numbers. When I've rated every song I total the score and divide by the number of songs which leaves me with a fraction (4.3, 4.7, etc.) as an overall rating for the album.
This is for my personal collection. On a site this big with so many albums having been rated I think the decimal system would be going too far.
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 11:21
|
Oh, look . . . the "No" option is winning. What a . . . shock!  |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 11:27
|
I'm not sure how against this I am so I'll give it 1/2 a nope. No I think if you don't think it can be improved on it's 5. Any less than that would be ......ummm..  ....4 maybe.------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 11:35
Okay, I give up.  I don;t know how many times myself and all those in favor of this must remind you folks, but we are not asking for a damned decimal system! Jesus! We're simply asking for a half star option between stars 4 and 5, how difficult is that to grasp? I'm not saying it's worth it, but at least base your arguments in some reality, here. You're talking about why we shouldn't have a decimal system? Fine, but the topic starter said nothing of the kind. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 11:39
I think you're missing the point, Micah. Oh how I crack myself up. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 12:17
This means I can't make up my mind for a 4.5 or a 9 (in a decimal scale)? Great. Thanks for the enlightenment. While we're at it, we should petition for quitting the 9,7,5 etc. grades from the decimal scale. Some say they make people dizzy. |
Posted By: GaryB
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 22:24
|
The mention of the term "decimal system" was simply a reference to something other than "whole numbers" and not to insinuate that your intent was to add a ".5" after 4, 3, 2 and 1.
The point of the reply was "No, I would not like to see 4 and 1/2 star rating in the review".
According to the green bars at the top of the page "No" is the majority answer.
|
Posted By: GaryB
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 22:40
|
I did some research on the net and found that the decimal system (.5) and the fraction system (1/2) are just awful darn close to being the same thing. XXX
(XXX is where you would normally put those little yellow faces. But I don't use them.)
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 22:46
|
After much consideration, I've finally decided to vote 'No'.
This seems really uneccessary, I've never had a problem with voting, because I use my bloody heart! It just seems really useless at this point - I didn't even really think about it until this whole thread thingy opened up, and its pretty irritating... JUST CHOOSE 4 OR 5! NOT BOTH! -Joel -------------
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: August 01 2009 at 02:44
|
^ when this site was created a decision was made to have a 5 star rating system. Suppose they would have made it a 3 star system (1 star = bad, 2 stars = good, 3 stars = excellent) ... would you still be telling people to accept it just because it was created that way? I think that introducing half stars here would indeed be useful, particularly for those who have rated an extensive list of albums (>1000). But then again, considering that ratings - by design - play a minor role here compared to reviews, it's not *that* important. ------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: ghost_of_morphy
Date Posted: August 01 2009 at 05:25
|
I voted yes.
My reason for that is fairly simple. There are many albums that are musical masterpieces but may not be progressive masterpieces. Four stars is where they belong in the current rating system, but sometimes one distinguishes itself far beyond that standard. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Nightfly
Date Posted: August 01 2009 at 08:11
| Try to see the rating as only a guideline, it's the content of the reviews that are really going to tell you how good it is. |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: August 02 2009 at 03:17
Okay, I admit, that was funny. |
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: August 18 2009 at 16:25
Oh bum - the "no" option is winning but tis only 30 to 23 (as of 18th August)Maybe I should have allowed a third option - 1/2 a yes and 1/2 a no |
Posted By: Tin Of Hurri Curri
Date Posted: August 18 2009 at 19:39
|
I think that it would not really be fair to those who struggle between, say, 3 and 4 stars, if there were a 4 1/2 star option but no other half stars allowed. I also think that 5 stars does not have to mean "perfect album--best music in the universe," because the rating of music is subjective anyway and you can always find a "flaw" in something if you're looking for one. Therefore, I think that having a 4 1/2 star option would make people a little too intimidated to give something a 5. I voted for "No," but I definitely understand your difficulty in choosing between 4 and 5 stars, PinkPangolin. Personally, I like it when people specify "4.5 stars" in their reviews, but the ratings should stay the way they are.
|
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: August 18 2009 at 22:16
|
From someone who struggles with 'what stars to give', we are given plenty of space in the reviews to call out any misgivings we have with any album. We can state those and give the album a 5 (it's perfect, but I personally think some of it ain't great) or a 4 (it's damned good but some of ain't great to the point that I can't give it a 5). 4.5 would just muddy the waters. ------------- Can you tell me where we're headin'? Lincoln County Road or Armageddon. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: August 18 2009 at 22:20
|
I have WAY more trouble picking between 3 and 4 stars than between 4 and 5. 4 or 5 is actually pretty simple because 5 should almost never happen, maybe a few times per year. The 3 or 4 thing can be excruciating sometimes. ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: SaltyJon
Date Posted: August 18 2009 at 23:07
|
I wouldn't be too against a system that incorporated .5, 1.5, 2.5, etc. but only adding in 4.5 basically makes 5 the new 6. If any system were added I'd say it should have all the .5s, not just 4.5. As it is, I voted No, and I'm fine with the rating system the way it is. Maybe once I've actually reviewed/rated more of my albums I'll change my mind, but that remains to be seen.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Salty_Jon" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 20 2009 at 10:29
|
I'm late here, sorry about it.
The problem at hand is that too many people think that giving 4 stars is harsh for an album that they like, so they go and give 5 stars. This is an attitude that needs to be changed rather than the ranking system.
Personnaly, I will give 3 stars to many albums that I really enjoy. I will keep my 4 stars ratings only for exceptional albums that I love listening again and again without skipping any tracks, and which I feel are close to being or becoming a classic of the genre. I will award 5 stars strictly to established classics, true masterpieces that have influenced several other artists, or to the very few albums that simply moved me way beyond 99% of the rest.
Thus it's the attitude towards the 3 and 4 stars ratings which should be changed. Once we start to see them as good ratings rather than harsh or poor, it mostly fixes the system.
I also think that this problem is especially present within the tech metal genres, where 4 and 5 stars ratings are commonly awarded to just any commonplace tech metal album... ------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 20 2009 at 11:13
Industrial strength praise for the above. Well said sir. I too have long believed that the rating system ain't broke but the raters clearly are. To wit, a positive review of a so-called classic prog album (3 stars) is perceived as a disrespectful slander of a sacred cow. You only need to try to reconcile the body text of reviews with the ratings to see that e.g. "this track's a bit boring and some of the shorter songs are just ok but a prog masterpiece 5 stars" Enough already.... ------------- 
|
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 05:00
All the comments from Tin of Hurri Curri (did I get that right?) have been superb - good stuff -thanks I have never before really appreciated that "3" is a specially good rating. Does 3 out of 5 equate to 6 out of 10? For a footballer on his Saturday's performance to be given 6 out of 10 would be considered "satisfactory" - he did his job but no more. Clearly in this website it means more than that - maybe it's more that the definitions ought to be altered. Maybe the mark in reality is out of 3. Then you get 3* and 3** for the "4" and "5" ratings. "3" is great, "3*" is extra-great, and "3**" is super-dooper unbelievably great.... Does this fit with what you're saying? |
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 05:02
| I meant to say "Tin of Hurri Curri" onwards - I left out "onwards" - otherwise it makes no sense... |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 05:56
|
Just this really: 3 stars = Good, but non-essential 4 stars = Excellent addition to any prog rock music collection (and it needn't necessarily be a prog album) 5 stars = Essential: a masterpiece of progressive rock music* *perhaps the 5 star definition is a tad blurry methinks i.e could you give a non-prog album 5 stars ? (I've never really understood this but I guess if it's listed on PA there ain't nowt stopping you landing 5 big wet smackers on that critter's forehead ?) -------------
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 06:12
I'll give you an example of what I do for four/five star albums. YES - 90125. I love that album, and I think it's perfect, but let's face it... Its only about 10% prog. As much as I'd love to give it 5, it's not a masterpiece of progressive music, rather pop/rock, and thats why a gave it a 4. -------------
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 06:31
Yep, that strikes me as entirely reasonable and logical but does an artist/album have to be 100% prog to warrant getting a 5 star review ? e.g I would probably want to give Queen (prog related) 5 stars for A Night at the Opera which I think is a masterpiece of erm...'plain vanilla' rock music. Am I just missing the point here (again) -------------
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 06:46
|
^^Nope!
It can be a relative 5 stars... Like... Jon Anderson - Olias Of Sunhillow (which I gave a 5), although its only prog related, I'd say its a masterpiece. I mean... I never thought of the example you gave
But, if you think its worth 5 stars as an album, then I'd say give it a five... Sorry, I'm not sure how to elaborate on my feelings much more than that
-Joel At the end of the day, -------------
|
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 08:35
|
Well, the way I read it, "an excellent addition to any prog rock music collection" HAS to be prog rock... I mean, if you start adding non-prog to your collection, it's no longer a prog collection... or do I miss something? That's why I wont give more than 3 stars to excellent non-prog material, and also because being non-prog, it hardly can carry the same complexity and artistic work than prog... Ok jazz can be complex too, but you know what I mean... ------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 08:41
I fail to see the relevance of football here, sorry
 This ranking system is made on a 5 scale, not 10. Then, 5 should be restricted to masterpieces. If every album that someone likes deserves to be a masterpiece, then I guess that dictionnaries will need to revisit their definition of "masterpiece"...
Technically, this tells me that the ranking system is basically on a 4 scale, where 1 and 2 are below median, and 3 and 4 are above. It's just that there is a 5 for very special cases that belong to the history books. Think of the Mona Lisa for instance.
------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 08:47
I too used to think this way (and it was PA's Admin Easy Money that confirmed my error:) "a jazz or electronic record can be 'an excellent addition to a prog collection' (ie 4 stars), basically I assume prog-rockers have other things in their collection besides prog, it just can't be 'a prog masterpiece'(5 stars)" so yes, the ADDITION can be a non-prog album eg Larry Young's (straight hard bop) Unity album would enhance/diversify any existing prog rock collection -------------
|
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: August 23 2009 at 09:25
|
No reviews from my uncrafty hand have appeared yet, but the first 4.5 star I'll round up to 5 and most others will be rounded down to 4, and it should the freedom of the reviewer to round up or down. But to make a 4.5 star rating possible while a 1.5, a 2.5 or a 3.5 should be rounded to an entire number makes no sense to me. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: August 24 2009 at 08:17
|
Why piss about with halves, simply go 0 to 10 (OR even 0 to 100), but 10 is awarded only after an album has been out for at least 3 years - so we can incorporate 'the test of time' evalution and allow some reviewers to grow up................................... ------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 24 2009 at 10:24
I agree a lot with the "test of time" criterion when it comes to any 5 stars rating. ------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 24 2009 at 14:29
|
Test of time? Hell, I might not be alive in three years. I rated The Decemberist's The Hazards of Love five stars not because it has stood any "test of time" (whatever that means) but because I believe it will stand the test of time (again, whatever that means- I take it to mean I will be heartily enjoying it in ten years as much as I do now. And if I don't? Eh, it's still a solid five for many other reasons). ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 01:38
Some albums don't need three years to be regarded as a masterpiece. Maudlin of the Well's Part the Second is the first album in many years to find a place among my favourites and I know that this will not be otherwise in 2012 or 2013, if I'm still alive and not shrunk by then. -------------
|
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 09:06
------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 09:32
Yeah, you have made a valid point and despite the dismissive tenor of the Ted Heath Band who posited the original idea, I do think it has some merit if applied to new releases of new material. I remember actually being positive about ELP's Love Beach when it came out but having reviewed same after a 30 year errand called 'growing up', now realise it is but a pile of pooh. I guess you are thinking of some sort of 'holding pen' for 5 star ratings of brand new albums ? -------------
|
Posted By: SentimentalMercenary
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 14:56
Something like that yes. Hold for how long I do not know; I thought that 3 years as proposed above made sense. But perhaps PA should even consider putting some restriction on 5 stars ratings for brand new albums... ------------- Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell. - Karl Popper |
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: August 25 2009 at 15:09
|
No because the site won't do it anyway so we should stop talking about it. ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: August 26 2009 at 03:34
That may very well turn out to be the case but you appear to have fallen victim to a form of rigor mortis prior to death. Bitterness flying under the half mast flag of cynicism is probably just the same washed out white colour as that of your surrender to hopelessness. Thanks for your creative input anyhow. -------------
|
Posted By: Badabing666
Date Posted: August 28 2009 at 18:33
|
The 5 star rating is a clean and simple methodology used by PA to determine an albums progressiveness. However, I use half ratings on my ipod (wish they had a 1-10 star option) as I like to rate how much I like tracks and sometimes need a rating between 3-4 and 4-5. But that is for my own personal consumption. If you are keen to rate albums this way then I might suggest that you mosy over to Progfreak. Me I like both but sometimes have to remind myself of the PA scoring system which has been an invaluable guide to bands and albums that I was not familiar with. ------------- 
|
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: November 01 2009 at 17:06
| That's a 4 and a half star answer! |
Posted By: The Block
Date Posted: November 01 2009 at 19:02
|
I would like to be able to rate it whatever you want, half, 1 1/2, and so on. -------------  |
Posted By: jampa17
Date Posted: November 02 2009 at 16:27
|
Jajajaja.. I guess the point is that there's no mess between an excellent addition and a masterpiece... is really easy to know it... if you don't think is a masterpiece, then give it a four... if you think it is, give it five... is not that complicated... ------------- |