new "star" ratings

Published on September 30, 2004 By Tiggz In WinCustomize Talk

I was rating a skin via my new homepage, which if I had gone thru the normal channels I would have given a 9 to. However, as there are only 5 stars in all, and it wasn't quite a perfect 10, I decided to click on the 4 star rating. Later on I was checking out the same skin, but this time via the normal WC library and I saw that I had apparently rated it a 7, which was certainly not indicative of my opinion.

So I decided to go thru all the stars and see what each one translated as:
5 stars=10
4 stars=7
3 stars=5
2 stars=3
1 star=1

it seems, if I use the star sytem to rate, I can either rate something that's pretty-darn-good-but-not-quite-perfect a 10... or a 7.

personally I'd like to keep the marks out of 10 system as it gives a broader choice, but failing that...well, I'm not sure, but the tarif as detailed above seems flawed to me.

Comments (Page 1)

Hus

on Sep 30, 2004

On Winamp.com, they have a 5-star rating system, but they have half-stars too. Maybe if WC had half stars it would even out a bit more. You could still only give either a 10 or an 8.5, but that's closer than a 7. Also gotta remember, that relatively soon nobody will be able to see the old ratings or the old site, so they will become useless. If every skin is measures with the same 5-star system, they will become relative to each other, even if you are technically rating it a 7, know what I mean? Either way, you make a good point, Tiggz.

EventHorizon

on Sep 30, 2004

It does have half stars.

But then again, you can't give them out...as halves are the product of the average of two different ratings...

Its a new system with new rules, dont worry about the old 1-10 ratings any more, think in terms of 'stars' from now on, not numbers.

And technically Tiggz, 4 stars would be an 8, not a 7... (10 divided by 5 equals increments of two.)

[Message Edited]

Tiggz

on Sep 30, 2004

EH, yeah, that's what I thought, but the list I posted is what rating the stars give to the skin when clicked not some numbers I invented personally

but you sort of bring up a good point - if the new system is going to be stars only that's all well and good - but if it's built on a foundation of the tarif as above then the underlying maths is...dodgy

EventHorizon

on Sep 30, 2004

but the list I posted is what rating the stars give to the skin when clicked not some numbers I invented personally

Ahh... *mental note to self, read posts more carefully*

Koasati

on Sep 30, 2004

Does it really matter? 4 stars is still 4 stars, regardless of what it might related to in the 10 point system.

[Message Edited]

Tiggz

on Sep 30, 2004

sure, but the underlying maths used to calculate averages should still make sense

Koasati

on Sep 30, 2004

Maybe it has something to do with the weighted system now in place.......... I dunno, but I'm sure there's a good reason for the math.

SelfExiled

on Oct 01, 2004

Here we go again, another ratings complaint thread.

goodmorphing

on Oct 01, 2004

I'm not so sure its so much a complaint thread as it is a 'how does it work?' kind of a thread. I have to admit that at first I wasn't even aware that clicking the stars actually made a rating. I was sure surprised to find that I had accidently given someone a 3!

[Message Edited]

Jafo

on Oct 01, 2004

The star rating vs decimal rating shouldn't be 'complicated'. The former replaces the latter.

Think of it as Celsius vs Fahrenheit.....the numbers may be different but the temperature is really the same.

1 star is the lowest 'rating'.....5 stars is the highest.

Revise your thinking to suit.

Don't get caught up in the mentality of 4.375 stars needing to be distinguished from 4.625 or something. The idea of 'star ratings' is to desensitize this whole pre-occupation with "why did it only get an '8' when the blue one got a '9'?"

'Good'. 'OK' and 'Not Good' would have been just as viable....except for averaging the words being a linguistic's nightmare....

SelfExiled

on Oct 01, 2004

Everything is fun in life at WC.

Apocalypse_67

on Oct 01, 2004

The only negative thing I see with the new star rating is that it encourages more of a personal rating rather than a rating granted on the overall skin's performance/usability.
The 5 stars are represented as 'I hate it, I dont like it, It's ok, I like it and I love it'
A skin that is very usable and performs very well, might get a 2 star rating just because the user 'Dont like' let's say...the color, or the round shaped buttons.
IMHO the read out should be more like 'Bad, Poor, Fair, Good, Excellent' or maybe just (1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10'

WOM

on Oct 01, 2004

Bad,below average, average, above average excellent.

WOM 'as 2 cents.

Forgot, I wonder when the # rating system will be gone?

[Message Edited]

Tiggz

on Oct 01, 2004

'Good'. 'OK' and 'Not Good' would have been just as viable....except for averaging the words being a linguistic's nightmare....

'Good' - 'Goodish' - 'OK-er' - 'OK' - 'OK-ish' - 'Not good' - '%$£*&!'

Essencay

on Oct 01, 2004

'I hate it, I dont like it, It's ok, I like it and I love it'

I'm okay with those descriptions, since I'm rating it personally

not as a review for others to read in a column, where an unbiased opinion on form and function is more important. If people don't like it....they don't like it. Just my 2-cents

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!