Oh and a somewhat related question, is T-Man still working on getting the ratings filters working again for the skins galleries, all skins still visible when not logged in.

Your rating is there. It's working.

Thanks...I just wanted to be sure ...it felt different lately..I feel my rating is not access class 3 - as Cavan said before - if a skin had a rate of 2.5 - all I had to do was rate it a 3 or 4 star. Not even 5 stars seem to matter when I rate at this time. Ive been rating skins a long time - I know not that many bother rating screen shots. Something doesnt feel right.

If something is rated a 2 star and you feel it should be a 3 star, you give it a 3. You don't give it a 5 because it will help raise the average up to a 3 faster.

Well....this has been a big debate for awhile. Im sure a few moderators will agree with me on this too. We dont have a rating system of 1 through 10 . On my end i get 5 choices. " I hate it " I don't like it " Its Ok " I like it " and 5 star being " I love it "

Its no different if I rate something 5 stars because I do actually " love " it..than the person that keeps hitting the 1 star " I hate it " because they just dont care for it. That wall with the Happy Face was well done...I happen to like it...It wasnt a Masterpiece but...last week there was a " wall" that stated " this is a screen capture " of my Media Player Visual " It had 3 stars.
How do you equate a screen capture of visual that someone else made the visuals..and nothing more than a screen shot of it and its rated a 3 star wall? No effort in that..at least the Happy Face took a bit of time to do and it was kinda fun.

/me contemplates a whole "Ratings are the Devil's work" hijack

This is not about " These ratings are unfair and sucky "

Its about something feels amiss to me. I dont want to bother logging in - d/loading skins and trying hard to give an honest opinion if its all a waste of my time because my ratings arent registering.

This is not about " These ratings are unfair and sucky "

Sorry fairyy, attempt at humor. I was (and am) aware that your goal was not to complain but to verify that everything was working as designed. Thus my use of the word "hijack" to take the post where is wasn't.

Sorry for any misunderstanding.

Sorry for any misunderstanding.

Not at all

I just didnt want people to misinterpret this as a rating bashing thread. This is something thats been bugging me for a few weeks. You know how something just doesnt feel like it usually does ? Ive had a lot of trouble logging in etc . I just wanted to take the opportunity to ask about it....

Well now, I just watched my latest submittal go from a 10 to a 7 in about 10 min after 258 downloads......strange to say the least.

I just looked at those ratings, what happened was a user with a higher rating than others who had previously rated it, cast a lower rating, bringing the weighted average down.

Thanks Zoomba...with a drop like that he/she must have really hated the piece!

Thanks Zoomba...with a drop like that he/she must have really hated the piece!

I didn't check that one...but my bet is it was something like 10,9,6...and the '6' was from a senior member.  Doesn't mean anyone 'hates' anything....just that the more experienced may be better at a value judgement....

fairyy ... I'm betting the problem you are seeing is a lag between you rating it and the site servers/cache/etc catching up and displaying the applied new rating input.

In all fairness the wall linked-to doesn't warrant the 3 or 4 '10's it has since received in response/revenge for whatever its initial rating was.  When you consider/compare all the walls here for some semblance of comparative 'grading' is it really as good as the best, or is it simply quaint/cute/ok/passable/usable?

If the latter, maybe '6', or '7' would actually leave a critic 'room' for largesse elsewhere.

Drive-by [non critical] ratings, be they '1' or '10' are equally as bad as each other....sure, a low one is unfair in itself, but also a high one denigrates all those others who may just actually DESERVE a high rating.  [people see a universally acclaimed wall at '8' and wonder why some bland junk has a '10' and presume prejudicial treatment...'naturally' the fault of the mods, of course].

If I 'really like something'...I don't give it a '10'....to get that it has to actually be good.

Same goes for the converse...

 

Hi everyone !
I'm able to rate just for few weeks and I try to do it as often as I can.
I took my access class 2 as an honour and I try to rate honestly and to be objective.
But I agree with Karen, and I already told her about that : I have the feeling that my rating doesnt change anything.
I understood that the "weight" of rating increased with access class. Probably one reason, because I'm only AC2.
But...I use Firefox and I noticed one thing : on IE, after rating it appears "rating saved". On Firefox : nothing. Could it be a browser problem ?

I just watched my latest submittal go from a 10 to a 7 in about 10 min after 258 downloads..

I noticed that, too...I submitted nearly 350 shots(and a few little other things ) and I just can say one thing : Low rating doesnt mean low downloads, "et vice versa"!

.just that the more experienced may be better at a value judgement...

Maybe Jafo, maybe not. Just because someone might be new to this site, certainly does not necessarily indicate that they are new to value judgement of walls or any other art form.

I have yet to see where my rating on anything has changed the stars. On my own stuff, I see the rating drop more and quicker than I see it going up. What burns me is there are no comments when it drops, but there will be 'good' comments and it doesn't go up. I would think if they leave comments where they say the work is excellent or such, they are also rating it, but I don't see it. I do see it go down, but no comments to go with those ratings. I have wondered myself why when I rate something higher than it is I don't see any change in the average.

My 'Rage Of Angels' wall that was delegated to my Personal Gallery at 4 stars actually climbed to 6 and still gets downloaded even though it's not in the main gallery, but has fallen back to 4 stars. That really kinda sucks, since it's not in the main gallery why even rate it or have it rating allowed, and again no comment to explain or justify the individual ratings.

I don't know if I would have the nerve to knock anyone's rating down. It's tough to get those stars. But I wish I felt better about wether or not when I add to their average, it was really being reflected.

I still think that rating access should be dependent on a comment. That would make drive-bys harder and give some meaning. It would also might make it easier to track problems. For example a user who leaves a carriage return as a comment then a rating tanks could be counseled.

My opinion counts for almost nil of course . . I have what . . three skins in the libraries. I've been hanging with the troll too much.

I still think that rating access should be dependent on a comment. That would make drive-bys harder and give some meaning. It would also might make it easier to track problems.

I agree 100%. Now if we could just talk the mods into it!

I find it funny how ones posse all rate ones work a 10 and no one bitches but when it starts getting lower ratings from people outside  of the gang the person cries that my ratings have tanked.  Oh well.  Something to think about.

I don't comment on all the things I rate, only the good ones.  I guess I could start if that would make people feel better.  Something like, I don't like this.  Or I hate this or its OK.  I think that goes along with the star rating.

If something is rated a 2 star and you feel it should be a 3 star, you give it a 3. You don't give it a 5 because it will help raise the average up to a 3 faster.

I'm sorry Zoomba but I disagree with your statement entirely. You seem to be implying you can insist on telling people how they may vote and what reasons they may use for determining their vote. It is their vote. They may vote however many stars they want and for whatever reasoning they wish to apply to determine their vote.

If I 'really like something'...I don't give it a '10'....to get that it has to actually be good.

Jafo you seem to be implying that whatever your tastes are in "good" is the correct standard for good. What do you mean by really good? What others will also rate as really good, popular majority and all? My own view is you don't like rating's inflation and wish to use your vote in that manner. That's certainly your choice to do with your vote. I've also noticed my vote doesn't count at all and hasn't in the past 2 weeks or so. It used to, or that is certainly how it appears to me. The other use of this rating system, in my opinion, although noone has stated this, is to discourage floods of poor quality material and the same with moderation. The only thing I'm still willing to upload is Screen Shots. So far, I can see no reason to change my mind in that. I have made some pretty good material of my own lately, but I'm completely unable to convince myself that it won't be turned into a needlessly painful process to try and share it here. You may have screen shots only for now.

I'm sorry Zoomba but I disagree with your statement entirely. You seem to be implying you can insist on telling people how they may vote and what reasons they may use for determining their vote. It is their vote. They may vote however many stars they want and for whatever reasoning they wish to apply to determine their vote.

I agree. And it concerns me this way. I know that the mods make an effort to keep on eye out for those that may slam a skin and knock it down more than 1 point/star. Sometimes, aan artist may have to bring it to their attention. Only once, that I brought it to their attention did it actually turn out to be something that merited a correction. That's fine. I'm just happy they listen to me 'bitch' and take the time to look. I appreciate it.

What concerns me with Zoomba's statement is that I get the impression it goes both ways. Correct me if I am wrong, but is it being implied that if the mods see something going up what they may think is too high, they will lower the rating themselves back to where they feel is appropriate?

If this is so, I suppose it's only fair that it 'does' go both ways..but then I have to wonder what the point of having the 'community' rate anything at all is all about. If it's more a less a fixed rating, and it's been predetermined that it can go 1 or 2 points either way (or 3 or 4 or whatever) before a mod intervenes and brings it back to what they think it should be, what good are our votes.

I'm probably cutting my own nose off with this, since any changes would have to go both ways.

Realizing that it is difficult to change how it is all done, I still would have to offer, perhaps letting the uploader decide if they want the ratings on, or just community rated, or mod rated would be one option. But that's not possible, I know.

I would still have to go with making it work so that you could not rate it unless you left comment. I think that would limit the drive-by's in both directions. I also believe it would make a lot of people happy (though you can't please everyone, but I think this would please more than less) and also make the mods job of having to keep an eye on the ratings a little easier. IMHO.

Jafo you seem to be implying that whatever your tastes are in "good" is the correct standard for good. What do you mean by really good? What others will also rate as really good, popular majority and all? My own view is you don't like rating's inflation and wish to use your vote in that manner. That's certainly your choice to do with your vote.

No...I've been modding and rating walls here longer than most...and actually tend to rate along the lines of how I can reasonably expect 'most' will consider the walls' worth.  I see the ratings applied, not just as an average but as each individual's rating including when and in which order they are applied.  It gives an insight far more clearly as to what 'consensus' might be than even what the averaged outcome actually shows.

Example.

When people make THEIR OWN determination to place a '10' on, eg, the linked wall....are they actually thus stating "wow this is the best wall possible, hence its rating" ...no matter what arbitrary criteria THEY choose as determining 'best'.  What if a BETTER one comes along, say, same author, same subject, but maybe greater execution standard [or 50 squillion resolutions to suit everyone]...is that now 'MORE BEST'?  Does the rating then go 'Spinal Tap' and play on ELEVEN?

We've heard the argument 'it's my vote, I'll use [abuse] it how I see fit' before....but would it please one and all in the Bootskin fraternity to know that there is one uploader who bought around 6 'subscriptions-in-different-nicks' just so these aliases could all post '10' on his uploads?  They did exactly NOTHING anywhere else...on anyone else's work.

Sure, he paid for the 'right' [read 'privilege'], but it's an abuse of the system....and was stopped.

If people cannot take this 'right' to vote sensibly and fairly then they can just as easily lose that right.  [It's definitely not 'inalienable'].  Adults are supposed to act adult.  More 'senior'/elevated-level members are supposed to lead by example.

Re my tastes of 'good' vs 'very good'....it's really an issue of relativity. No-one should be getting '10's just because they are a mate, or prior stuff was/is good.  Reputation does not make good work....good work makes reputation.  The determination of 'good' can, if you must, be equated with popularity, but that must be tempered by on-going comparatives and experience....eg Britney is a 'popular' female singer, whereas Joplin would be more equated with 'good'...

My opinion is that if a person cannot honestly say their history of rating has neither been favourist nor inflated [either direction] then they may as well just stop rating at all....

If this is so, I suppose it's only fair that it 'does' go both ways..but then I have to wonder what the point of having the 'community' rate anything at all is all about. If it's more a less a fixed rating,

Po....it's EXTREMELY rare....probably twice, maybe thrice.....ever.

Drive-bys have been an issue with only around 3 people that I can recall....maybe 4.....that have come to attention and prompted reaction.

Nearly all emails [to me] regarding ratings issues are a knee-jerk concern/reaction to what appears a rapid fluctuation and which often turns out to be various servers getting out of sync and the numbers are all over the place until someone kicks another one back into line and the wobbles are over.

There WAS a little while in the past where my OWN rating ability went south [2K7 growing pains] which led to some quite odd happenings when I modded/approved things....but bug-squashers came to the rescue...

My statement on rating is based on how the system is intended.  It is intended for people to give the rating they feel a skin deserves, not to game the system into how they want the final outcome.  That's how systems based on averages work.  I've had several people come to me complaining when they feel they received unfairly LOW ratings.  From what I've seen in those cases it's the same idea as stated above, only the person has been trying to game the system into drastically lowering the score. (In cases where that occured, it was not griefing... it was the same genuine belief that they were trying to reach the final desire score)

A skin has a 7, a user thinks it's really a 5.  They give it a 1, not because they feel it's necessarily a 1, but because they know that will help bring the average closer to the final 5 they feel the work deserves. 

In that case, people get bent out of shape.

If you're OK with gaming the numbers to get a higher score, you're condoning the same method to drop a score.

To the concern that mods might be knocking skins down by removing those artificially high scores much like we do artificially low ones on the rare occassions we find someone is griefing another user.  It doesn't happen.  In general, we don't watch the relative motion of ratings on any individual skin, there are just too many.  Most of the time, we don't look at a skins overall ratings unless a problem has been brought to our attention. 

As Jafo said, it's actually very very rare for any mod to alter a rating given by a user.  There has to be heavy evidence that the rating is malicious or very obvious fraud (i.e. an account that was created one day, and on the same day it gave an individual artist 10s on ALL their work... and then never logged in again.  Not a real case, but a potential extreme).

I'm sorry Jafo, I cannot agree with you because your statements come pretty close to implying this voting ethic you and Zoomba subscribe to is the standard for determining voting abuse. If I see something has a 1 or 2 star rating and I believe it to be too low, in my opinion then that is my opinion. I also believe I have a reasonable capacity to think for myself and to determine my own actions and, since I have to be responsible for all my conduct(good and bad), I think that does give me the right to determine for myself what my voting ethic is. Hence if I want to give something 5 stars where others don't that is still my business and a responsible use of my vote in my opinion. If the citizens have the capacity to notice when something is underated and vote as they choose to correct it, surely they have the capacity to notice when something is overated as well. Why all this tendency to not accept that people can think for themselves and often form a variety of opinions?

When people make THEIR OWN determination to place a '10' on, eg, the linked wall....are they actually thus stating "wow this is the best wall possible, hence its rating" ...no matter what arbitrary criteria THEY choose as determining 'best'. What if a BETTER one comes along, say, same author, same subject, but maybe greater execution standard [or 50 squillion resolutions to suit everyone]...is that now 'MORE BEST'? Does the rating then go 'Spinal Tap' and play on ELEVEN?

What difference does it make what they are thinking when voting is supposed to be one of the perqs for subscribing? It is no wonder voting secrecy became the standard when voting for elected officials. It was the only way to curb coercion. My money for subscribing was my money until I gave it to WinCustomize when it became WinCutomize's money. I'm not demanding an accounting of how its spent or specifying any personal ethics on what may or may not be done with it. Now it seems you want to maintain control of how I vote. Futhermore, I never said it's my vote I'll abuse it if I want. I said I can think and reason for myself. I will apply my own reasoning to my own vote just as you do. Your last two questions are simply a recasting of concern for ratings inflation.

"When people make THEIR OWN determination" Apparently you are implying that all members votes are the property of you and WinCustomize. That people have no capacity to determine for themselves, or when they do, they are only capable of abuse of the system. That's pretty horrible of you Jafo. Think about it. You are trying to argue I have no right to vote plain and simple unless I follow the same voting ethic you have. Let's hear it for the one party system. Diversity is not tolerated.

If you don't think its not fair to give a person 5 stars because you believe its rated to low at 2 stars, then quit pissing and moaning when someone gives you 1 star because he feels that its rated to high at 5 stars.  Fair is fair.

Fair is fair.

That's what I meant about it going both ways. There really is no way around it. Whatever you change to fix one side, would have to apply to the other.

That's why, I'll say again, (lol),

I would still have to go with making it work so that you could not rate it unless you left comment. I think that would limit the drive-by's in both directions. I also believe it would make a lot of people happy (though you can't please everyone, but I think this would please more than less) and also make the mods job of having to keep an eye on the ratings a little easier. IMHO.

I really think this is worth trying.

That's pretty horrible of you Jafo. Think about it. You are trying to argue I have no right to vote plain and simple unless I follow the same voting ethic you have. Let's hear it for the one party system. Diversity is not tolerated.

You are really and profoundly missing the point.

Each work should be considered on its own merit...and if you think it is effin-damn good...give it a '10'...that's entirely fine....but do NOT try to put a 20 on it because it currently is only 6 and you think everyone's AVERAGE MUST EQUAL YOUR TOTAL '10'.

If it is OK...show so by giving it an OK vote...YOUR OK vote....not push it to stupid levels so the average becomes what you think its average should be...in YOUR own opinion.

THAT IS NOT THE INTENT of the system.

Some clearly seem to think that rather than vote FOR the Democrats simply shoot the Republicans and they'll be in by default....

Do you see the distinction?