Rating System

JeffStarkmann

JeffStarkmann

Virgin
I need to ask this question!
I have lately a problem with a bad rating of my stories/thread (1/5). I'm totally fine if someone don't like my whriting style or my the plot I'm creating but in my opinion the rating system is too anonymous!
I see a rating like a user rated threat A "1/5 from 1 user". But there is no comment, no possibility to see if the same user rated another thread of my story bad or if an other user rated my other thread also 1/5.

I would be nice to communicate with the user who rated my story bad and it would be nice to see if one user rated 15 threads of my story bad or 15 users rated each of my 15 threads bad!
 
Currently the rating system is anonymous.

In your case about 90% of the ratings should be from me. Maybe you noticed that the ratings differs from your stories. I don't dislike the general idea ot that stories.

I don't left comments, because they are irreversible at the moment.

If you want to talk about the reasons, just start a conversation with me.
 
I think it would be better if it wouldn't be anonymous. So everyone can decide for its own if he trust the rating of certain user or not. Otherwise I would suggest that each user can rate a story only in general one time. So the total rating wouldn't be dominated by the user who rated the most threads of a story.
 
Non-anonymous rating would result in less ratings, because the fear of revenge rating.

It would be really bad, if a user could only rate once per story.
Much stories are collaborations of more than one user. Then the rating wouldn't say anything about the writing of one of the users. If you only have 10% of the threads, people could dislike it, althought the story has a good rating in general.
Same applies for single threads. If you get one rating per story, you can't see, if the people like your new post or the direction your story goes.


The main problem is, that most people don't rate the threads they read.


At the first time as reader I didn't voted at all and saw no neccessary within.
But as writer it is annoying to share your content without any feedback.
For that reason I decided to rate every single thread I read and made clues to set the rating.
 
Trugbild said:
Non-anonymous rating would result in less ratings, because the fear of revenge rating.
Click to expand...
This might be because I got spam-rated by a walking abortion yesterday, but I really don't see the problem with this.
Beyond that, the comment system hasn't been anonymous since the transfer to the new site, so that problem already exists when it comes to any potentially constructive negative feedback, i.e. along the lines of "I have a problem with your story, and here's why."
 
I like it when people rate my stories.

I LOVE IT when they comment.

Comments I can reply to, they can offer advice and critique, like one user who improved my 'Teen Island' story by pointing out that only commissioned military and coastguard ships have the 'USS' designation.

I personally think the two systems are complimentary, rate if you want to express your opinion but remain anonymous, comment when you really have something to say.
 
Simon_Silver said:
I personally think the two systems are complimentary, rate if you want to express your opinion but remain anonymous, comment when you really have something to say.
Click to expand...

And I simply don't see any upside to keeping the ratings anonymous, other than that it allows you to get away with giving a story or lots of them a low rating.
As for revenge ratings - and I know you weren't the one who brought it up - that could just as easily happen already, albeit for different reasons (someone rejected your thread or disagreed with you on the forum).
 
YouTube doesn't share your account name when you rate a video. IMDB doesn't share your account name when you rate a movie. iTunes doesn't share your account name when you rate a song or an app. That only happens when you leave a review or comment to explain why you gave the rating you did. On the Internet, complete anonymity is offset by the fact that when you hide behind it, you add nothing to the conversation. You cannot argue for your opinion without exposing yourself to response. It's a problem that solves itself.

Also, the fact that readers can "get away with" having a negative opinion about someone's work is the upside of an anonymous rating system. Look how many cases there are of critics who leave poor reviews on Amazon or Goodreads, then find themselves being hounded by vindictive authors.
 
Patzo said:
It's a problem that solves itself.
Click to expand...
And since it's pointless, why even include it? That other sites do it isn't an argument in and of itself.

Patzo said:
Also, the fact that readers can "get away with" having a negative opinion about someone's work is the upside of an anonymous rating system. It protects them from vindictive authors.
Click to expand...

Which also opens up for the kind of thing that happened on the old page, i.e. someone going through a story and 1-rating dozens of threads just because they're an asshole (although they banned him). It's an upside that can just as well be a downside.

I would be more sympathetic to your argument if it was up to the editor of a story whether or not to allow ratings/anonymous ratings.
 
gunde said:
And since it's pointless, why even include it?
Click to expand...
It's not pointless. It's still a means of providing feedback, just one that's more convenient for the reader/audience/consumer than the author/artist/creator. Some people can't articulate their thoughts beyond, "I did (or did not) like this." Some people don't have the time to express their full thoughts. Some people don't care enough to express their full thoughts. As much as a good rating feels nice, you have to take a bad rating on the chin, because ultimately, neither one is for your benefit. It's how reader communicate quality to each other.

And yes, I understand that it's harder to draw in new readers if, by that logic, previous ones have communicated your work lacks quality. It still doesn't mean they're obligated to explain the thought process behind their opinions.

That other sites do it isn't an argument in and of itself.
Click to expand...
Let's flip the assumption. Why do you deserve to know the identities of people who rate your work? What are you going to do if someone rates your work poorly and you can see who it is? How many readers do you risk losing when that person tells everyone about being confronted for something they perceive as trivial? This is the position other sites start from because they want more people to engage with content through views, ratings, comments, what-have-you, and, as Trugbild said, people aren't going to do that if they think they'll be punished for doing it the wrong way.

Which also opens up for the kind of thing that happened on the old page, i.e. someone going through a story and 1-rating dozens of threads just because they're an asshole (although they banned him). It's an upside that can just as well be a downside.
Click to expand...
That is shitty behavior and it can't be justified. At the same time, that is one single guy with an axe to grind, and he does not represent the huge majority of readers. It makes no sense to assume every reader could be like him, out to tear down undeserving authors, when that is so far at the extreme of how people behave.
 
Simon_Silver said:
rate if you want to
Click to expand...
to rate means, that you just read it. So I would recommend rating all threads you read.

gunde said:
someone going through a story and 1-rating dozens of threads
Click to expand...
rate every thread you read and such low-ratings won't harm the author/story.


non-anonymous ratings...
It would be no problem for the most people to create a lot of accounts and stray bad ratings.
The site would also have to provide a way you can see, who rated, which would be result in more effort than a cached number.


Maybe there could be an option for the moderators to see, which user only give 1-star-ratings to find out black sheeps
 
Trugbild said:
non-anonymous ratings...
It would be no problem for the most people to create a lot of accounts and stray bad ratings.
The site would also have to provide a way you can see, who rated, which would be result in more effort than a cached number.
Click to expand...
Good point. Even if you make everyone's ratings visible, you've done a lot of work to change nothing unless you somehow (and I have no idea how you'd do this) stop people from creating dummy accounts at the same time. That would require some way of verifying the real identity behind an account, and this is an erotica site. How many people will be comfortable providing that information?
 
Patzo said:
It's not pointless. It's still a means of providing feedback, just one that's more convenient for the reader/audience/consumer than the author/artist/creator. Some people can't articulate their thoughts beyond, "I did (or did not) like this." Some people don't have the time to express their full thoughts. Some people don't care enough to express their full thoughts. As much as a good rating feels nice, you have to take a bad rating on the chin, because ultimately, neither one is for your benefit. It's how reader communicate quality to each other.
Click to expand...

You do have a point.

Patzo said:
Let's flip the assumption. Why do you deserve to know the identities of people who rate your work? What are you going to do if someone rates your work poorly and you can see who it is? How many readers do you risk losing when that person tells everyone about being confronted for something they perceive as trivial? This is the position other sites start from because they want more people to engage with content through views, ratings, comments, what-have-you, and, as Trugbild said, people aren't going to do that if they think they'll be punished for doing it the wrong way.
Click to expand...

And if I repeatedly freak out and attack someone for leaving a 1-rating on one of my threads, then I'll suffer for it in the long run. That's the good thing about transparency, it promotes accountability.

Patzo said:
That is shitty behavior and it can't be justified. At the same time, that is one single guy with an axe to grind, and he does not represent the huge majority of readers. It makes no sense to assume every reader could be like him, out to tear down undeserving authors, when that is so far at the extreme of how people behave.
Click to expand...

Yes, but since the huge majority of readers apparently don't rate threads, shitty behaviour can get an impact way beyond what it should, which suggests that the system might be broken, or need revision.

I've never been a fan of Facebook-style likes, but they seem like they might keep the upside of the ratings for both the writers and readers, while decreasing the risk of abuse. In my experience, anything other than 5's or the occasional 1 is rare, so actually being able to rate threads in between seems superfluous.
 
gunde said:
In my experience, anything other than 5's or the occasional 1 is rare, so actually being able to rate threads in between seems superfluous.
Click to expand...

When I rate, I usually use 3 or 4. Therefore I would even prefer a 7-star rating to give a 5 or 6.

I would rarely give a 5, because it means, that writing, idea and story would be perfect.
 
And I've rarely received those, and rarely given them. So we've got a graded system that is interpreted differently by the minority of people who actually use it.

Edit: It's possible that I've received a few of those, but can't tell if I have, since the combined ratings system doesn't use a marginal anymore.
 
Trugbild said:
It would be nice, if at least the author could see the decimal places
Click to expand...
It would be better if it was scrapped or replaced by something that at least 1 in 20 actually use. Basically, the ones who actually do are the equivalent of critics, and professional people who get criticized both get to know who's critiquing them and are able to respond, should they want to (although that is often a terrible, terrible idea).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top