Why not 4 and 1/2 stars?? Please...
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=59869
Printed Date: April 07 2025 at 05:58
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why not 4 and 1/2 stars?? Please...
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Subject: Why not 4 and 1/2 stars?? Please...
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 04:52
|
Oh - please - why can't we have a 4 and 1/2 star rating on the reviews?? I know options should be limited - and there would be no point in 3 1/2 or 2 1/2 etc.. BUT... There are so many brilliant albums out there that don't quite make it to a classic masterpiece but they really are almost there that a "4" (8 out of 10) isn't good enough and "5" (10 of 10) is too much. The website insists on thinking really hard about awarding a "5" and indeed very few albums really deserve "perfection", but because "4" is too low, people are forced to award too many "5" ' s. On the other hand, people think something's not quite perfect but nearly there and award a "4" because they are forced too, but in reality it's not enough. Oh, think about it - how many times when you review an album you are really struggling with the thought - is it a "4" is it "5". Oh, go on....  |
Replies:
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 05:43
| There have been many discussions on half stars already. Do we really want to go there again? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 05:47
YES!!!  Really.....no.  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Easy Livin wrote:Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 05:52
|
Sorry - I fully appreciate that there has been many discussions about this, and I kind of thought that when I posted this - but doesn't that go for most things in these forums?. I personally have never been in any one of these discussions about 1/2 stars, and I was just interested - selfish I know But what do you all really think? |
Posted By: Fieldofsorrow
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 05:54
|
It sounds like a pretty good idea to me. I mean, I've reviewed a few things, and had exactly the same dilemma as PinkPangolin described in a couple of instances. My major problem is that although an album may be of top notch quality, it isn't necessarily 'essential' to every prog fan's collection - very few things are, I would say. But four stars looks very understated when commenting on an album that is truly fantastic. ------------- Groovy teenage rock with mild prog tendencies: http://www.myspace.com/omniabsenceband |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 05:56
|
My vote is a no again. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 08:24
There are other websites which offer more rating steps ... 
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 08:27
|
People simply underestimate the stature of 4 stars and therefore overuse the 5 star choice way too often. 4 is not just a good album, it's a really GREAT album. You just need to adjust your thinking to limit your 5s to those few albums that are truly special, that magical top shelf of masterpieces that is a very small percentage of anyone's recorded music collection. With a little practice, you begin to realize that not every album you enjoy needs 5 stars. It took me quite a bit of time to adjust to that, but now it is second nature. Good luck I actually agree that having a 10 scale would make rating simpler, I just don't think we'll ever see it happen. I think it would be a lot of work for the big guy. ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 08:39
|
Why not 3.124348989828 stars. Or 2j stars. Or 6 stars, in case you ever need to rate Dream Theater's Scenes From A Memory Metropolis on a scale of 6 to 100 In short, I think there are sites... Mike's for one, which cater nicely to the micro-ratings crowd. As it is, I have enough trouble deciding between three and four... deciding between good but not essential or good but not essential and a half seems even more difficult. As it is, I think the problems are basically three-fold. 1. The rating criteria we've got now aren't perfect, but they can fit most shades of opinion pretty well. If you want to distinguish a four star you really like from one you think is just there, you've space in the review for it. 2. The reviews/ratings already on the site would be sort of compromised in terms of impact because I don't think anyone could be bothered to go through all their old reviews and fix things up by half a star. 3. It would be a lot of work for poor M@X. And
is dead on. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 08:42
|
Nothing to stop you from inserting "4,5 stars really!" in your review.
|
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 08:45
I've always personally thought that 4; 5 stars more accurately impresses the delicate balance between an excellent addition to any collection and a masterpiece of progressive rock. Additionally, you can go 4 ;5 stars if you want to suggest it's more masterpiecely. Ah, the exquisite power of the semi;colon. |
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 08:55
Yep I think that´s the solution. If you round up or down is your own choice but it gives an indication wether you think the album is above or under a certain rating. No need for neither a 10 scale nor half stars IMO.
|
Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 11:15
My thoughts exactly. 4 stars is very rarely "not enough" when it actually is a great score for any album/DVD. Everyone should make this notice, 5 separates the best, but the ones that deserve a 4 are still priviledged. |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 14:34
Like what websites Mike? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 14:36
|
^ Rateyourmusic.com is supposed to be quite nice ...
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Figglesnout
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 14:42
|
The mods have decided several times not to institute this change, so we should stop asking about it. ------------- I'm a reasonable man, get off my case |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 14:44
I do love that website.  ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 14:45
Is dat some Mandrakeroot reference? ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Conor Fynes
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 15:19
| I personally think things are fine... Usually if I'm unsure, I won't review the album just then and give it a few more listens to see if my impression improves or deteriorates. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 15:38
|
I'll tell you. The real reason you want to give the half star is because you like the album enough that you don't want to lower its 4.x rating with a four, but you don't think it deserves a five. HOWEVER, if we implemented half stars, very soon we would suffer ratings inflation from all the other people who agree with you, and all those albums would now be 4.5x, and we'd have exactly the same problem. Now, one could argue that we would have a more accurate problem, and I would be inclined to agree, since we already have ratings inflation, but it wouldn't satisfy the hunger that gnaws at your soul. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 15:50
|
You guys do realize that many reviewers (including myself) have had to specify ''4.5'' at the end of their reviews, because site itself doesn't give us that option? Would it really be that difficult to make a half-star rating option available? |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:09
|
Stars are stars. If a more precise rating was adopted, it would have to be points. Instead of 4 or 5 stars, we could have 15/20, 18/20... '4.5 stars' sounds like 'problems coming your way': some people could ask for having more precise semi-decimals like '3.75', '4.25' or '1.115'. |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:15
I'm not asking for a literal '.' anything. But how else am I supposed to type out the equivalent of half a star? I swear, all people are asking for is something that most other review sites already have; the ability to split a star in half for more precise ratings. You'd think we were asking for the admins to cut their arms off by the way they react.  |
Posted By: Mr ProgFreak
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 16:18
|
^ Over at PF we started with 15 steps, later changed it to 20 and now we have 100 steps (0.0 - 10.0), which seems to please everyone. You usually only need the fine grained steps in the upper area of the scale, so in practice we have fewer steps ... and of course no member has to use them, some are perfectly fine with 20 steps (5.0, 5.5, 6.0 etc), 10 steps (5.0, 6.0, 7.0 etc) or even the 5 star system (2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 8.0, 10.0).
------------- https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike" rel="nofollow - https://tagyourmusic.org/users/Mike |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 18:42
|
*sigh* Let's recap, shall we? 1. The more important aspect is the review. If you rate something 4.5 and don't say why, I don't care. You can rate something a five, but explain there are unlikable aspects to an album, or rate it a four and say why it's almost a masterpiece. Either way, we have your thoughts- infinitely more valuable than a rating alone. 2. Using the five star system in place means you are forced to think more critically about the music before you. I have put off a few big reviews because I still have not made up my mind about whether a certain album is a four or five. This draws me into a deeper appreciation for the music, and forces me to make a decision, not go "Gee, there ought to be a .5 system in place at PA." 3. If you require more incremental ratings, there are many other sites that oblige (like our Mr. Prog Freak's site). I honestly think the ratings system we have here is perfect- it doesn't allow for virtually unjustifiable numerical nitpicking (with all due respect to PF), and forces us to make up our minds about what we as individuals think is a masterpiece compared to what is merely an excellent work. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 18:55
Well, I'm just gonna have to respectfully dissagree with ya on that one, Rob. To me not having a .5 option doesn't make appreciate the music more; it's just annoying. But oh well. I didn't start this thread, and I never will start a thread like this. However, since somebody else did, I just felt like putting my two cents in. I've figured out by now that PA is like a bunch of conservative right-wingers; they don't like having new ideas suggested to them no matter how much sense it makes or how many people may agree with it. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 18:59
PA is anything but! Do you read the political discussion thread, for instance? *Waits for Slart to intrude with an obscure comic* Now my opinion could be swayed...if we implemented a .5 system, would my album benefit any? ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:03
i didn't say they were right-wingers, I said they behaved that way when it came to suggestions for improvement. Or at least that's what I've seen happen 'round these parts. But I digress . . . perhaps I am being a bit harsh. I'm just tired of seeing nearly every suggestion given in this place hardly regarded by anybody as being serious. They're all just kind of waved away as foolish, then the Admins and/or my fellow Collaborators proceed to explain why PA is perfect just the way it is. If this truly is the case, then this section of the forums might as well not exist. This is just an impression I'm getting, and I'm not trying to speak badly of anyone here, nor am I intending to start any fights. *hides* 
 Classic!Actually, yes, it would! I've found myself in this position many times of not being able to bring myself to rate something a full '5', yet feel it deserves more than a '4'. Your album was one of those moments. |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:06
And much like liberals, every else loves to complain, and they're not the ones that have to do the work. Kidding. I think it's more along the lines of a bit of a nuisance, really - M@X and admin have already answered the question, to have to keep hearing it over and over. I know new people come in and aren't necessarily aware of the history, and initial debate is fine and proper, but a decision once rendered should be at least be respected, if not agreed with. In all honesty I'm on your side, I'd like to see a finer granularity (10 instead of 5) for ratings, but it ain't gonna happen, so I don't sweat it. |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:07
|
I agree with the .5 ratings
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:08
Well, certainly, I agree with you. I mean, Like I said, I wouldn't have begun a topic like this on my own time, because in all honesty I don't find it all THAT big of a deal, but whenever someone else brings it up, I feel like I might as well give my side of the story, since the debate is already re-opened, if ya know what I mean. |
Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:10
Pat wins the thread. I agree with both you and Micah on this one, but I'm not pushy in getting a new ratings system. ------------- 
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:10
Most people here do, it seems. Which is why it confuses me even more, but as was pointed out to me before in a similar thread a while back, PA is NOT a democracy. Basically that means that the number of people for something makes little to no difference at the end of the day. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:10
|
Anyway, PA is perfect. Low taxes and no abortion. That's how we like it 'round these parts. Now, wanna go huntin? And ideas aren't dismissed easily...they are carefully considered and not poo pooed away- I think several changes implemented in the past year have reflected this (ex. non-collabs having a review weight of 5 instead of 3, the way the charts are calculated, etc). But the people who do the dirty work of running this site have to weigh the benefit to the work involved, and I don't think more incremental ratings are worth all the business necessary to make them happen (and prolific reviewers might have a time going trough old reviews to make their ratings more accurate). It's easy enough...this is how I see the ratings as we have them: 5: Masterpiece 4: Excellent 3: Good 2: Fair (or as I prefer to call it, "Meh.") 1: Poor- suitable for toilet tissue should I run out ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:16
Yeah that's fine.PA works for me at the moment.But I wish you could view artists albums from ratings and chronological.But I'll save that discussion for a rainy day. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:18
Oh now you've REALLY done it!  |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:37
 ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:37
|
Stars Die.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:46
|
Posted By: TheSubhuman
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 19:48
Finally somebody who has seen the light. No suggestion here is taken seriously, and the result is that people have left the site in droves. But you cannot force people to listen to you. They will just point out, and not necessarily in a pleasant way, that either you accept things as they are, or you can leave - no matter how hard you have worked on behalf of the site. If anyone bothered to look at things a bit more in depth, they would realize there are LOTS of things that are in need of fixing, and the review section is only one of them. |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 26 2009 at 20:01
Not fair, my friend. I never said anything of the sort, and if I came across this way, i am truly sorry. I do not fault a single person here for their choices. After all, running a site like this is a HUGE job, and I'm sure the Admins do their best. Please do not think I don't appreciate what they do here for us. I was merely pointing out that at times they make decisions that confuse me, but I'm sure they have their reasons. |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 02:19
Well said... There are many albums I'd love to give 5 stars, but they aren't "a masterpiece of progressive rock music" per se... This creates some massive annoyances. But In this case, and album usually won't fit the criteria of 5 stars, as it isn't a masterpiece of prog. In those instances, I'll give a 4. But I love the system ------------- 
|
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 02:28
I am in complete disagreeance with you, TheSubHuman. The progarchives Admin and Collaborators are all pretty much incredibly helpful people, and I'd genuinely like to see proof or evidence of what you said. The PA admins are always grateful for assistance, and never "...just point out, and not necessarily in a pleasant way, that either you accept things as they are, or you can leave". After 5 months, I've never encountered a problem to the likes of which you described, and I've never had a single complaint against the collaborators or admin in that time. Evidence, or hush. -Joel -------------
|
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 05:38
|
1) 5 stars is fine. 2) If you're not happy, imagine you only have 3 and that's been upped to 5. 3) If there was a system with 100 stars, there would be people complaing that it's a) too much and b) still not enough.
4) I must admit it would be fun though to watch people agonising over whether to award an album 4352 or 4353 stars in a 10 000 star rating system.
 5) If you're in two minds whether to award 5 stars or not, you shouldn't.
|
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 05:57
And there's the win of this thread!!! EXACTLY!! Use it sparingly folks, so it really means something when you do use it. There should be no doubt in your mind whether or not the title you are rating is a masterpiece. And as mentioned earlier, I'd favor 10, but it's not likely to happen here. It isn't that Admin refuses to hear the case.....they have heard it.....as has Max no doubt, and decided not to proceed with it. These kinds of issues really shouldn't be harming your ability to express your opinion, that is what the text of your review is for. You can specify there if you wish something like "7/10" or 3 1/2 stars. People will understand. ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 27 2009 at 09:04
| People please, don't screw with the space-time continuum... |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 13:28
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 13:32
Lol, 2j stars?!! An imaginary score ftw. Why not just let the user choose a percentage and log that, but round it to the nearest star and use that for the rating math. That way there's an illusion of choice. ------------- 
|
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 18:29
|
Errr.... Wow everybody - remember I only asked for 4.5 not anything else (not 3.5, nor 2.5, nor2j nor 6 out of 100 or 4532 out of 10000) - merely 4 and a 1/2. I agree with the sentiment that you can write "4.5 really", but you still have to click the circle, and the quondry (*how do you spell that?) remains - is it a "5" but 4.5 really or is it a "4" but 4.5 really? Ummmm....  For all those that Agree with me - I can see there are a lot of you - DUDES!!! Has there ever been a poll on this? How about put your money where your mouth is - whoever wins the poll then that's what happens (or doesn't) - challenge time!  |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 18:42
The problem is that the admins just don't care. This argument has been brought up and shot down time and again, and rather unfairly in my opinion, However, as I mentioned above, the admins are busy fellows, and they don't want to focus on anything except what is absolutely necessary. Problem is, a lot of people seem to think that a beter rating system is in fact necessary. But if the admins don't think so, then that is how it stays. And the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round . . . |
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 22:28
Wise words matey, agreed. I do also think that the 3 star rating has come to be perceived as a lukewarm or damning appraisal of an album (It ain't, it means you deem it to be a GOOD record) Furthermore, a great many of us are certainly guilty of rating way too high i.e. those reviews you see where the author trashes 3 of the tracks as 'boring' 'ordinary' 'dull' etc and still lands a big wet tonguey 5 star smacker on the critter (go figure) I have given extra half stars to albums in the past (as part of the body text) but on reflection I think the introduction of this feature would be counter productive i.e. the current rating system forces you to make a clear and unequivocal decision about how you rate the music and half stars would just blur this division. The description tags attached to each number slot strike me as being both well thought through and unambiguously defined. (God that sounds really sycophantic.....) You wanna try defining one of the proffered new slots ? ****1/2 stars - Excellent addition to any prog rock music collection although not essential but less non essential than a *** Once again I fear these debates boil down to what people really want from 'PA' i.e. do they want to make informed purchasing decisions based solely on a numerical rating ? (if they do they are credulous beyond belief) or do they want to take the time and effort to extricate themselves from the subjective quicksand that is musical appreciation ? Blah etc ------------- 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 28 2009 at 23:04
| If you want to split hairs for your rating or add qualifications to it, you are more than free to do that in your written review and explain why. Helps you make your minimum word count (guilty but not as too much of a matter of habit). I'm on the side of not changing it because it's been in place for a few years now and aren't you messing with those who have picked ratings in the past by recalibrating the scale? |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 01:09
All the man was asking for a half star option between stars 4 and 5. It's not like he was asking for an entire re-working of the whole damn rating system. Sheesh.  |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 01:27
Hmm... Very good point
I can't think of anytime something has been changed... But on the other hand, I can't say I've seen anything of urgency that needs to be changed soon. -------------
|
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 02:03
+1 I don't see how this would cause anyone to have to recalculate anything. And I don't buy the slippery slope argument that people would want smaller divisions than half stars. That seems inane. -------------
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 02:06
It happens every time without fail; someone proposes a perfectly sensible 'upgrade' to the rating system, then every blessed member jumps his case and starts saying that what he really wants is a complete re-working, and small fragmented stars, and how much work that would take, and so on and so forth. I just . . . don't get it. |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 03:07
|
Just going to throw in my two cents while the discussion's still hot, I'm all for the half star intervals. There are several albums that I know are between the already predetermined intervals, most notably in the 3 1/2 and 4 1/2 star range, though I know I have a couple 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 ones that I could easily and happily change.
Ivan had exactly the right idea of how to do this in a discussion not too long ago. Just install half star increments. People don't have to change the ratings if they don't want to, and the people who change their ratings will be more accurate.
As for the categorization standards, Ivan also had the right idea.
5 stars: Essential: a masterpiece of progressive rock music
4.5 stars: Still a masterpiece but may not be essential for some
4 stars: Not a masterpiece but close to the status, excellent addition to any Prog collection
3.5 stas: Excellent addition to any prog rock collection
3 Stars: Good addition for any Prog Rock collection, excellent for followers of the sub-genre
2.5 Stars: Average
2 stars: Fans/Collectors only
1.5 Stars: Diehard fans Only
1 Star: Not reccomended, buy it at your risk
0.5 stars: Only for those familiar the band, the album and sure of what they are buying, otherwise, avoid it.
Here are the consequences, positive and negative:
A large group of people would feel more satisfied with the rating so that it matched their review
Ratings would change slightly to fit just a bit more towards the community's average. Albums like Tresspass and Tales from Topographic Oceans will rise because they are classics though less important or interesting and fit the 4.5 rating nicely. Ratings in general will probably also rise.
People will ask for more intervals, in which case we can continue to do more intervals or easily ignore it. In my opinion 10 intervals for ratings is fine with me. This can of worms is probably going to come out again inevitably, but we have a counterargument by saying 'it's better than what we used to have'. -------------
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 29 2009 at 09:07
That's not a too bad scale actually. Ultimately I don't care too much. The content of the review matters much more to me than the rating. But I'm warning you, it will screw up the space time continuum. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 16:48
I do fully respect what you are saying, and it makes sense - it's just that I do find it ever so hard to make my mind up whether an album is a 4 or a 5. If it's less than 4 it's not a problem for me personally. By the way I love this website - it's fabulous, and I don't think it really needs many changes, and I'm certainly not going to go off and join somewhere else instead. I understand it's not easy to make changes (to get agreement with everybody is hard). To be truthful, though, it's the personal reviews, though, that attracted me at first (ie the best bit) - a review of "Meddle" by Pink Floyd infact. Cheers for your support all you Prog-heads - up the 4 and a 1/2 !!! |
Posted By: PinkPangolin
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 17:05
|
PS - I've put a poll vote on this in Prog polls forum. Sorry if that's annoying pp |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 21:38
|
Didn't read through any of the comments, but my guess is every single admin/mod is against the idea. I can't blame them. Even though I like the idea of half stars, (in my opinion out of 10 is much better than out of 5) it's too late. I mean first you'd have to make the new rating system and the bigger issue they would have to go through EVERY album and change the ratings. Can't have some out of 5 and new ones out of 10..... It would just be impossibly difficult. However, that is reality....for the pure sake of discussion I like the idea of a half star system. |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 21:58
|
^ If we simply added half stars we wouldn't have to change anything if we didn't want to. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: July 30 2009 at 22:03
I guess. But still it would be off wouldn't it? The fact all those are rated under the old system. Dont get me wrong, I like the idea. Just there is a better chance of a snowball surviving in Hell then this happening. Seriously, I have never seen anyone on top be open to any change, especially a drastic one like this. Not to mention reviewing is a HUGE thing to a lot of people. I like the half star idea, but the rating system is fine really. Besides, hate to be the balloon popper, but there's no point to this...it will not be changed. |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 11:31
|
^ What JJLehto says is correct; nobody higher-up cares about this, and it's just not necessary. So why would they change something like the rating system when most people are fine with it just the way it is? Oh, and by the way . . . while I would much prefer a half-star system, I am still one of those people who are fine with the rating system as it already stands! I'm on your side, but it just isn't a huge concern, I'm afraid. The site runners here are more concerned with really important things, like . . . . erm . . . like re-arranging the artist page layouts and changing font styles! Now, THAT's real work there, my friend! |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: July 31 2009 at 11:37
|
Yeah.... I mean I've had struggles deciding between 4 and 5 stars. If you're having a tough time deciding.....better just go with 4 stars. Really not an issue. What grinds my gears WAY more than the rating system is why some bands are even listed on this place and why there is no "Prog Album" section. |