Quote:
Originally Posted by Just C
First off a 1 to 10 rating scale is inconsistent. It can never be a solid measurement of a persons skill level or progression when 1 mans 10 is another mans 5 is another mans 4 is another mans 2 is another mans 8 ect ect ect.
Thanks to this arbitrary system you can see someone post well thought out witty and intricate lines lose out on a hotlist place to some one due to the more critical voters being attracted to the better writers and voting lower due to their more critical voting.
While the lazier writers /beginner level writers get a spot on the hotlist due to the more knowledgeable/critical voters not voting on them because they don't want to read garbage while the people on that same simple level vote anything from 7's to 10's in their droves because it's easier for their lower level confined thinking to get. But when they vote on a more accomplished writers battles they vote lower because they don't get it or they see the more accomplished voters getting critical and feel the need to follow suit on some sheeple shit.
Not only that. But because we have this 1 to 10 scale. People tend to focus on the score more than the feedback. Especially if it's a low score.. You take away the scoring system and it breaks down that emotional barrier that is a low score and opens up a route to the feedback.
The system is dated and counter productive and causes more problems than it solves.
Remove the rating scale and replace it with a simple click to vote for winner. And for tracks a like or dislike tab
Hotlist requirements should be based on 2 thing.
1) The amount of votes a battles gets.
2) The total accumulated VP.
It's a lot easier to receive a dislike as 1 mans preference than it is to receive 1 out of 10. Just as it is easier to take someone simply voting for the other guy rather than them voting for the other guy THEN to add insult to injury hand you a 1 out of 10
No more bitching about low rates. No more inconsistency's of seeing a dope verse get a 5 and a really shitty 1 get a fucking 10.
You vote your winner, leave your feedback. nobodys got cause to complain. Nice and simple. Nice and clean. straight to the point. no imaginary meter judging your skill level.
|
I agree that having a hotlist based on amount of votes and accumulated VP would be more ideal in reflecting the battles that
should be on the hotlist. However, I disagree with some of your premises and reasoning for wanting to get rid of the rating scale. There is nothing wrong with one man perceiving a verse to be a 10 and another man perceiving the same verse to be a 5. That's just human nature to have varying views and I wouldn't even seek to control that. I wouldn't say the rating scale is "inconsistent" because of instances like that...more like the voters themselves are inconsistent with each other as far as how they rate certain verses. If we're talking "inconsistent" as far as some sniper getting 10's from his buddy voters and a vet getting 6's and 7's from more educated voters, I think the fact that these are
different voters on
different battles makes things pretty self-explanatory. When you hover over the Estimated Text/Audio Skill stars under any battler's name
, the number you see is the average of all the ratings they have ever received in their Text/Audio battles. When you hover and compare the numerical star ratings of people who most people would consider vets or heavyweights with everyone else, including the snipers who we may have seen receiving 10's once or twice and being on top of the hotlist, the system is actually pretty accurate. Because of that, I'd venture to say that cases where snipers are receiving higher ratings and vets receives lower ratings because their battles are attracting more critical voters are FAR more the exception than the norm. It doesn't merit getting rid of it because of that alone. Getting rid of the scale certainly would end people complaining about "low ratings", but I highly doubt the general quality of feedback given by voters would be any better than it is now, but it would be the only measure, so yes, I can see how it may lead to battlers focusing more on the feedback. I don't think having a minimum character in order to place a vote (in order to get more feedback) is a good idea either. From a battler's perspective, the more people have to say, the better...and we all hate those FV VB comments...but realistically, I think it would lead to people voting even less. People are lazy. Forcing them to have to input a certain amount of words when all they want to say is "I think one got it" will make them even less inclined to vote. So it sounds like a good idea that would lead to longer, better expos, but I don't think it would work out the way some of you might think. It will make voting across the site even more dead.
I do agree with you that having a hotlist based on the two things you mentioned, amount of total VP and votes...makes a lot of sense, but I'd be more in favor of tweaking the current system to resolve some of the issues and attain the same results than a complete replacement for a number of reasons which I'm not going to get into right now because it will be another novel.
One practical way to approach this would be to just have the rating scale as an option....the same way you can vote on battles and and pick a winner without necessarily having to rate their metaphor, wordplay and punchline skills. Then people can pick a winner and drop an expo without rating...but if they also want to give a rating, they can do so as well.