Shouldn't RwRs excluded at all?

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Being aware that the topic of RATINGS WITHOUT REVIEWS has been discussed here already dozens of times I nevertheless would like to suggest that RwRs should not be considered at all to calculate the avg. rating for an album. I'm not quite sure how are the official rules currently, whether they are still allowed or not. In case this option has been suspended already however I do not understand why RwRs already given are still counted. For example I realized when I reviewed latest output of CAST, which is really not that bad but had received a 1-star rating and for this will probably not have the chance ever to rise above 3,0 in average although deserving one around 3,5 I would say. I mean allowing this option which is abused in general by inappropiate 1 or 5 star ratings opens all doors for discrimination of less known bands and for fleecing of more popular ones for whom it's much easier to balance a 1-star by 100s of other ratings!

What do other people and especially the Admins think about that?

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
hdfisch Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: December 25 2004 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 513	Topic: Shouldn't RwRs excluded at all? Posted: May 14 2006 at 08:38
	Being aware that the topic of RATINGS WITHOUT REVIEWS has been discussed here already dozens of times I nevertheless would like to suggest that RwRs should not be considered at all to calculate the avg. rating for an album. I'm not quite sure how are the official rules currently, whether they are still allowed or not. In case this option has been suspended already however I do not understand why RwRs already given are still counted. For example I realized when I reviewed latest output of CAST, which is really not that bad but had received a 1-star rating and for this will probably not have the chance ever to rise above 3,0 in average although deserving one around 3,5 I would say. I mean allowing this option which is abused in general by inappropiate 1 or 5 star ratings opens all doors for discrimination of less known bands and for fleecing of more popular ones for whom it's much easier to balance a 1-star by 100s of other ratings! What do other people and especially the Admins think about that?
	To be prog or not to be, that's not the question! Sillyam Likesbeer

W.Chuck Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: October 27 2005 Status: Offline Points: 606	Posted: May 14 2006 at 10:48
	It's great that they are forbidden now, but sadly they are still counted - imo they should be calculated into the average rating!


Tristan Mulders Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: September 28 2004 Status: Offline Points: 1723	Posted: May 14 2006 at 11:11
	Would it be too much of a problem to complete get rid of all the ratings without reviews that are already present on the website??? I too agree that this effects the objectivity of ratings of albums.
	Interested in my reviews? You can find them HERE "...He will search until He's found a Way to take the Days..."

Easy Livin Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin Joined: February 21 2004 Location: Scotland Status: Offline Points: 15585	Posted: May 14 2006 at 14:27
	To clarify: Ratings without reviews (RwR) are not forbidden now, they are still accepted They will not be prohibited, or deleted. They are seen as allowing members who for whatever reason cannot(or feel they cannot) submit reviews to participate in the site, and record their views. These may be non-English speakers, people who feel their reviews are inadequate etc. The vast majority of RwR are the sincere views of the poster. The ratings are weighted so that ratings with reviews count as double those without reviews. Collaborator ratings count as 3 times RwR. This has been discussed many times, and the arrangement now in place is the final solution. There will not be further changes of policy relating to RwR for the foreseeable future. By all means feel free to discus it though.

hdfisch Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: December 25 2004 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 513	Posted: May 14 2006 at 14:41
	Many thanks Bob for clarification! I find the system as it is just now quite good (+review = 2x, +Collab review =3x). Nevertheless I see quite often inappropiate RwR (1 or 5 stars) and someone (was it Tony R?) mentioned in some other thread that in fact 60% of them are like that. Don't know whether this is really the case. Any I've got the impression somehow that the rating system on our site is not that perfect. Each time when I compare the avg. rating for an album here with that one on Rateyourmusic.com I find the latter one much more realistic and most of the times it agrees with my own one. Of course there are much more people giving ratings there compared to here. I've got to say that even by Collabs many albums on Progarchives are just overrated whereas some others are rather underrated especially when there is no Collab's or not any review. Just my own view though!
	To be prog or not to be, that's not the question! Sillyam Likesbeer