The FIVE STAR rating system

Hi Rob. I know what you mean.

Shadowlands et al certainly deserve more than a 4 Star rating, as you've indicated in the reviews. The only option from a reviewers point of view is to round up to 5 stars ( as too many people appear to do) or do as you have, and leave deserving albums harshly treated given the current system. 

Until the reviewing system changes, you simply have to read between the lines in the reviews. Check whether a reviewer's tastes fit in with yours by checking their other reviews and then act accordingly.

Using my theory, as my taste is very much in line with yours, I will not be buying The Culture of Ascent, however Inconsolable Secret will be a must! 

Go on, review those ABBA cds!!!

Roj.

I love statistics, I love Cricket averages, how quintessentially BRITISH, thus more complexity would be more up my street as it were, 5 grades is just to inflexible, like only 5 heights for human beings to grow to!

Certif1ed wrote: M27Barney wrote: Thanks for the replies, What about the problem of a Reviewer, who clearly isn't into Band A, yet reviews all the output and gives them one star! Whats the point? It's like me reviewing  all of Abbas CD;s and trashing every single one! Thats why a review must be from the aspect of the reviewers MAIN taste. Eg. I know Reviewer A has given band X CD Y a four star and I correlate this review with others by the same person  and reason that Rev A has very similar taste to me, thus he reviews another and gives it a FIVE, I would be very interested in that CD. Also high star ratings have lead me into purchasing some right turkeys, I'lllet you guess which ones!     I think there should be a system of "Rate the Review", similar to the system on Amazon.   This can be tied into the album's rating algorithm, so if a review gets high marks from readers, then the album's score gets a corresponding bonus score.   Just an idea...

I've considered suggesting this but I doubt it will happen given how worried the site can be about the feelings of its members.

I also think a 10 step system is needed, though I doubt it will ever happen, since it's been suggested and seemingly well-supported ever since I've been here and still hasn't happened.


The main problem Bob and Guigo raise is having to change all the reviews, which I think could be solved by adding 5-10 temporary reviews editors to work for six months or so until they're all changed.  Or they could simply not change the ratings at all, at the risk of angering non-collabs.

micky wrote: pfffff..... not to mention... and our collabs should know it.  The site.. and M@X have more important things to be concerned about.  Too much work...  for no real purpose.

Maybe M@X does "have more important things to be concerned about" but surely the satisfaction of the members of his site should be a top priority, perhaps THE top priority after the security and safety of the site (which I imagine constitutes much of what you're referring to with "more important things").

As for calling meeting the wishes of the "general populace" (so to speak) "too much work for no real purpose," all I can say is I disagree about as much as I possibly can.

It seems like every change to the site's format and design (of which there have been a lot in the past year) have been made with no input from members (and, unsurprisingly, widely disapproved of in many cases), whereas ideas like the half-star system, which have been around forever and supported every time they've been brought up, are consistently ignored.


@ those who are suited with the current system: the beauty of the .5* system is that you are still able to use the the basic five star scale.  In that sense, those who want .5* options get their wish, and those who don't lose nothing.


Edited by Pnoom! - July 14 2008 at 16:55

micky wrote: have I told you recently I love you....

  hmmmh ... can't remember Micky - but I'll give a 10 star rating for this - we should exchange our addresses anyway ...    and use private messages ... 

micky wrote: Rivertree wrote: micky wrote: have I told you recently I love you....    hmmmh ... can't remember Micky - but I'll give a 10 star rating for this - we should exchange our addresses anyway ...    and use private messages ...  private????  pfffff.... I guess have a bit of a streak of voyaurism in me

I don't wanted to ask for - but now I know ....

^ and what is the point of that... so someone can give an album 4.5 stars instead of just deciding between 4 or 5.  Give me a break

what's next... 4.25 stars for those can not decide between 4 and 4.5 hahahha.

Why do we need stars?

Can't it just be the number?
Or how about the A,B,C and F system?
No, thought not.

I think that ratings are much more important than reviews ... but not here in the archives. The reasons are:

1. Limited number of choices, forcing you to add a review to clarify
   
2. You can't change ratings once you submitted them (collaborators can, but not the normal users)

My point is: In the time it normally takes to write one lengthy review people could easily submit ratings for 30 albums.

I wish that more people gave PF a try - in a way it is the exact opposite of the archives when it comes to the actual ratings. Maybe we could start some kind of collaboration ... people could rate their collection at PF and continue to submit reviews here.

As Dirty Harry  said " I hate the system myself but as long as it`s the only thing going I`ll stick with it " Personally I think the review should stand by itself with no rating. Magazines such asThe Wire which contain many reviews in each issue don`t have rating systems. I think that by the tone and content of a review yiou can pretty much tell what the reviewer thinks of the CD/DVD.

^ I'm not only crazy about statistics. The problem is simply that most of us don't have the time to write reviews about all our favorite albums. IMO the perfect solution would be to first rate all the albums in your collection, and then to add reviews for the albums that you know best. First listen: just submit a rating, maybe a short comment. 10th-or-so listen: adjust the rating - we all know that some albums grow on us, some "shrink" - and then maybe write a lengthy review. The point is: Without the ratings people are always only going to know about a very small percentage of all the albums you listen to, and your opinion about them. If we all submitted more ratings, the obscure albums would be a lot less obscure. Maybe they would not have more reviews, but they would have a more solid base of ratings.