Print Page | Close Window

Ratings & shorts reviews listing - inequity

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42166
Printed Date: February 24 2025 at 08:26
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Ratings & shorts reviews listing - inequity
Posted By: convocation
Subject: Ratings & shorts reviews listing - inequity
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 10:24
It seems too easy for these <short> reviews and <ratings with no review at all> to be used to manipulate the overall rating of a album.  You can't stop them, and you can't exclude them - unless the Admin. folks decide to exclude an insufficiently justified rating - but it seems a little unfortunate that so many reviewers try to articulate some reason for their rating, but it holds no more weight than another person who doesn't even share some kind of perspective before just picking a star rating.  This is especially damaging to "albums"  that have very few reviews to begin with...many of these  cases are  actually  much neglected, I think, undeservedly.

Perhaps these " Ratings & shorts reviews listing" star ratings could be weighted differently than those ratings that are provided outside the Site guidelines.
Yes guidelines are not rules...just thought the ratings might carry even greater credibility if some consideration was given to this.....

Apologies if this is an already existing thread topic.  I didn't see it.  Maybe I'm searching with the wrong keywords.



Replies:
Posted By: Atkingani
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 12:00
Originally posted by convocation convocation wrote:

It seems too easy for these <short> reviews and <ratings with no review at all> to be used to manipulate the overall rating of a album.  You can't stop them, and you can't exclude them - unless the Admin. folks decide to exclude an insufficiently justified rating - but it seems a little unfortunate that so many reviewers try to articulate some reason for their rating, but it holds no more weight than another person who doesn't even share some kind of perspective before just picking a star rating.  This is especially damaging to "albums"  that have very few reviews to begin with...many of these  cases are  actually  much neglected, I think, undeservedly.

Perhaps these " Ratings & shorts reviews listing" star ratings could be weighted differently than those ratings that are provided outside the Site guidelines.
Yes guidelines are not rules...just thought the ratings might carry even greater credibility if some consideration was given to this.....

Apologies if this is an already existing thread topic.  I didn't see it.  Maybe I'm searching with the wrong keywords.
 
They are, convocation... Smile
 
Ratings without reviews & reviews with less than 200 characters have weight 1 while complete reviews have weight 3 or 10 (for the case of being a Collab/Prog Reviewer). 


-------------
Guigo

~~~~~~


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 12:48
See the FAQ's thread for detials...


Posted By: rileydog22
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 14:20
Originally posted by Atkingani Atkingani wrote:

Originally posted by convocation convocation wrote:

It seems too easy for these <short> reviews and <ratings with no review at all> to be used to manipulate the overall rating of a album.  You can't stop them, and you can't exclude them - unless the Admin. folks decide to exclude an insufficiently justified rating - but it seems a little unfortunate that so many reviewers try to articulate some reason for their rating, but it holds no more weight than another person who doesn't even share some kind of perspective before just picking a star rating.  This is especially damaging to "albums"  that have very few reviews to begin with...many of these  cases are  actually  much neglected, I think, undeservedly.

Perhaps these " Ratings & shorts reviews listing" star ratings could be weighted differently than those ratings that are provided outside the Site guidelines.
Yes guidelines are not rules...just thought the ratings might carry even greater credibility if some consideration was given to this.....

Apologies if this is an already existing thread topic.  I didn't see it.  Maybe I'm searching with the wrong keywords.
 
They are, convocation... Smile
 
Ratings without reviews & reviews with less than 200 characters have weight 1 while complete reviews have weight 3 or 10 (for the case of being a Collab/Prog Reviewer). 


Wait: a prog reviewer's review counts over THREE TIMES as much as anyone else's review?  Isn't that a little much?  I don't think that a prog reviewer's opinion is worth the opinions of three other people. 


-------------



Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 14:59
Maybe you'll be persuaded when you become a PR!Wink


Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 15:04

Do Colab/PR reviews of less than 200 characters carry a 1 weighting too?



-------------
What?


Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: September 30 2007 at 15:52
No, no such distinction for PRs/SCs. It is assumed PR's/SCs will want to write a review anyway.



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk