Ratings vs. Reviews - a calculation
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=10291
Printed Date: December 12 2024 at 06:57
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Ratings vs. Reviews - a calculation
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Subject: Ratings vs. Reviews - a calculation
Date Posted: August 18 2005 at 13:38
|
I obviously have too much time on my hands ... I was wondering how the ratings which are submitted without reviews differ from those with proper reviews: http://www.uneasy-listening.com/elements/apps/mreviews/https/r_vs_r.html - http://www.uneasy-listening.com/elements/apps/mreviews/https /r_vs_r.html For each album I computed some information from the info available on the website. You can see how many ratings were submitted with proper reviews (in green, I counted them) and how many were submitted without reviews (in red, computed from the other data). It's interesting that for the albums which have very good REVIEWS, the ratings without reviews are much lower. For Octavarium it's interesting that the average of the ratings without reviews is very close to that of the reviews.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 18 2005 at 13:41
What? ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 18 2005 at 13:42
Oh I get it! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 18 2005 at 13:54
|
I'm quite a smart-ass, aren't I? I just wanted to find out if the "anonymous" ratings are really affecting the average rating of the albums. I think that the Octavarium example shows that it's really not a big deal - for popular albums. Psychotic Waltz is a different story ... it wouldn't surprise me if the two anonymous two star ratings are from the same persons. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: King of Loss
Date Posted: August 18 2005 at 13:57
I agree. |
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: August 18 2005 at 13:58
| Experience would suggest the stats for DT Octavium are just plain wrong and so, untrustworthy. I have to suggest the fan base has collectively manipulated them, an idea supported by the fanzine level of enthusiasm for the album reported in threads in the last 4 months. Simply this doesn't do the band or their albums justice, especially with those people less familiar with the band's albums but considering buying and sampling. Some greater honesty needs to be shown - but that in part requires broader experience of the prog genre as a whole and perhaps, as suggested elsewhere, the ultimate 5 star award has to be clearly shown as being deserved (rather being an anonymously awarded). I strongly feel new albums, like a good wine, need some time being laid down before called vintage/5 star (hence the nonsense of Francis The Mute in the Mojo/Q top 40 prog albums list) - so no new albums can be 5 stars. |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: August 22 2005 at 07:56
|
Soon or later , this issue will have to find a solution. I do not really care for the top lists , but others do and are ready to cheat and beat the systenm to bend the concept the way they want it to go! Funnily the albums you have pointed out, seem to be in the same genre, not a surprise when one knows the average age of that genre fans, obsessed with best of list , best friends etc..... A little immature. Is this applicable to other styles?????
MeR, you do have too much time on your hands. ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
good job!
Posted By: cobb
Date Posted: August 22 2005 at 08:13
|
Very good Mike, now if you wouldn't
mind graphing that and submitting a hypothesis of your findings by the
end of the day that would be good. All jokes aside it is proof enough that where a fan base is involved ie. PoS and DT, the rating system may be failing. Take PoS in red - 20 five star and a total of 6 in other. I believe Octavarium would have had similar stats it hadn't been so prevalent in the threads at the time of its release. The higher (red) number of others may have just been anti-fans doing their bit to work the system. |
Posted By: riversdancing
Date Posted: August 22 2005 at 08:31
Or the older progheads take a dim view of the lot of progmetal
"essential" stuffs in the top 100 among the great really essential
masterpieces from the great really essential sacred cows. Frankly, few days ago a thread was opened celebrating the new number
one on the list, Genesis - Selling ... then at least 4 Yes - CTTE
reviews appeard within an hour to ensure its pole position. A little
immature If someone rates something without writing a review then it should
be indicated. For example "*** - the album has rated by John Doe,
Special Collaborator, date". What else can the soliution be? |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: August 22 2005 at 08:38
Yes, that would be an easy to implement first step to making the rating system more transparent. All the ratings without reviews should be shown in the list of reviews ... just one row indicating the rating, the reviewer user name and the date. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|