Clarify No Rating

[chapcrap]

I don't have a good plan. Sorry for that. There is a thread about bringing back feedback. That was the system used before ratings. Some kind of hybrid would probably e the best.

The problem with the rating system is that almost everyone just gives 5s to everyone for eveything no matter what. It's just not really representative of reality.

[zimmah]

I don't have a good plan. Sorry for that. There is a thread about bringing back feedback. That was the system used before ratings. Some kind of hybrid would probably e the best.

The problem with the rating system is that almost everyone just gives 5s to everyone for eveything no matter what. It's just not really representative of reality.

indeed, and the ratings medal doesn't really help either because it only add incentive to leave a massive amount of ratings without really caring what rating you leave. And the tags are hardly used and even if they're used there's no telling if they are 'just'.

[CafeT]

Now that the site is under new management, perhaps someone can just modify the ratings page so no rating doesn't show zero stars but instead a blank space, e.g.

[CafeT]

any official response on this proposal for a simple aesthetic change?

[macbone]

CafeT, I agree that something should be done about the ratings, and I like chap's suggestion of a complete ratings overhaul. I prefer the tags to the stars, personally, although some folks have no clue what the tags are for (Good/Bad Teammate in a singles game, for instance).

I'm guilty of leaving all 5s as well. In fact, I rarely leave anything else unless someone's play was just horrendous. I think it's pretty sad that people get blasted for leaving 3 stars for people with obviously average play.

Has the Ratings page always been missing a guide to stars? At the very least, it should have an explanation at the top of what the stars mean and a link to the page with more information. The info page should also include "0 stars = No rating left", as well.

[Fazeem]

I don't have a good plan. Sorry for that. There is a thread about bringing back feedback. That was the system used before ratings. Some kind of hybrid would probably e the best.

The problem with the rating system is that almost everyone just gives 5s to everyone for eveything no matter what. It's just not really representative of reality.

YEah I get in arguments with people and have even been foed for leaving 3 star ratings I am one of those rare people that actually sees the tooltip when I mouseover and have always used it based on that. I have a rant on my wall about this I completely agree that a over hall is needed explain more about feedback I do not remember this and why was it taken away?

[dshedd]

Hello,

So, when you give a player a "rating" you can give 1-5 stars. You cannot give a zero star rating. This is totally fine. However, when you look at your ratings, sometimes a person will rate two of the three things (say, "fair play" and "gameplay" but NOT "attitude"). When you look at such a rating it looks like someone gave you "zero" stars for attitude, when they in fact simply did not rate you on that category. People get mad and say: "HEY! WHY DID YOU GIVE ME A BAD RATING??" or something, when really NO rating was given.... it just LOOKS like they gave you zero stars for something. I think, on the ratings page, having a symbol for "not rated" would eliminate confusion. I realize this is trivial, but anything that keeps the bad vibes down in internet games in general is helpful.

Did that make sense? Cool.

Best,
dshedd

Concise description:

• xxxxxxx

Specifics/Details:

• xxxxxxx

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• xxxxxxx

[Metsfanmax]

Hello,

So, when you give a player a "rating" you can give 1-5 stars. You cannot give a zero star rating. This is totally fine. However, when you look at your ratings, sometimes a person will rate two of the three things (say, "fair play" and "gameplay" but NOT "attitude"). When you look at such a rating it looks like someone gave you "zero" stars for attitude, when they in fact simply did not rate you on that category. People get mad and say: "HEY! WHY DID YOU GIVE ME A BAD RATING??" or something, when really NO rating was given.... it just LOOKS like they gave you zero stars for something. I think, on the ratings page, having a symbol for "not rated" would eliminate confusion. I realize this is trivial, but anything that keeps the bad vibes down in internet games in general is helpful.

Did that make sense? Cool.

Best,
dshedd

Actually (unless this has changed since the last time this topic came up), you can leave zero-star ratings, and you do every time you neglect to give one.

[DoomYoshi]

If you click the star to the left of the 5 you can leave a zero-star rating. It shows up as "No Rating" though, meaning there is no way to distinguish between the 2 options.

Neither of you guys even have platinum, so what are you talkin about?

[Metsfanmax]

If you click the star to the left of the 5 you can leave a zero-star rating. It shows up as "No Rating" though, meaning there is no way to distinguish between the 2 options.

Neither of you guys even have platinum, so what are you talkin about?

I have zero ratings left if you take a look. Following that logic, all of my un-left ratings should be destroying other people's ratings!

[DoomYoshi]

Sorry, there appears to be a misunderstanding here.

Not leaving a rating at all does not count as a rating on another player. I didn't mean to imply that it did.

However, if you leave a 5-star for gameplay and a 0-star for an attitude, it is listed as "No Rating". I don't think it contributes to score. That isn't the point though.

The point is, if you are incomplete, you might only leave a fair-play rating and say nothing of gameplay and attitude (leave them blank).

When I look at my own ratings, lots of people have left me 0 star-ratings. Some of these intended to give me zero-stars, and some intended to leave it blank.

There is no way to distinguish between these two options.

Imagine a question: How do you feel about Obama?
We take all the answers that say No Opinion and all the answers that say Worst President Ever and then combine them to one category called "Zero Stars" with no way of distinguishing between them. That's what we have.

[DoomYoshi]

Ok, I just checked.

No Ratings don't count. So there is no way to leave a zero-star rating.

[Metsfanmax]

However, if you leave a 5-star for gameplay and a 0-star for an attitude, it is listed as "No Rating". I don't think it contributes to score. That isn't the point though.

It may not be the point of this suggestion, but I was correcting a mistaken assumption. If you leave a rating in one category but no rating in another category, that's averaged in as a zero to your overall score. Example: Joe leaves a 4-star rating in Gameplay, a 3-star rating in Attitude, and no rating in Fair Play for John. When the overall ranking is calculated for John, Joe's rating is averaged to get (4 + 3 + 0) / 15 = 2.3. Then this is averaged in with the averaged score of every other contributor. Whether that's a desirable feature or not is a worthwhile topic of discussion.

The point is, if you are incomplete, you might only leave a fair-play rating and say nothing of gameplay and attitude (leave them blank).

When I look at my own ratings, lots of people have left me 0 star-ratings. Some of these intended to give me zero-stars, and some intended to leave it blank.

There is no way to distinguish between these two options.

So, as long as leaving no rating for a category does in fact count as a zero star rating, then there's no reason to distinguish the two. If we change that so that there is no zero-star rating effect, then I'd agree with that there needs to be a distinction.

[DoomYoshi]

Not true. 0s are not counted.

If 0s are counted, it should not say "No Rating" and should instead say "0 stars".

Chapcrap left me with 2 no ratings. I doubt he is trying to say I have zero playing ability and zero attitude.

A guy I suicided into left me with a No Rating also. I'm pretty sure he was trying to leave me with a zero, but didn't realize there was no such thing.

From the Rules:

Each rating consists of measurements from 1 to 5 stars

[dshedd]

Well, I think this just proves how confusing it is.... since we have a few different opinions on it right here in this small conversation!

But, seriously. I don't think you can give a zero star rating. If you look at the instructions for ratings under the "the game" tab at the top of the screen, it says:

"To encourage good sportsmanship, members can rate other members they have played with. Each rating consists of measurements from 1 to 5 stars on any of the following attributes: fairplay, gameplay, attitude."

It then says that the scale is: "1=Bad....5=Excellent".

I don't think you can give 0 star ratings. But, I guess I think that it should then look like something was "not rated" not look like someone gave somebody a "zero."

Or, if I'm totally wrong about this and you CAN give zero ratings, then it should look different than when you simply don't rate one of the categories....

I'm fascinated that my suggestion has gotten this much traffic! You guys rock! I would totally give you ALL 5 star ratings. But, only on a scale of 1-5...

[dshedd]

yes! exactly Doom Yoshi!

[DoomYoshi]

DoktorDave

You can do calculations on his ratings to see what's up.

[Metsfanmax]

Not true. 0s are not counted.

If 0s are counted, it should not say "No Rating" and should instead say "0 stars".

Chapcrap left me with 2 no ratings. I doubt he is trying to say I have zero playing ability and zero attitude.

A guy I suicided into left me with a No Rating also. I'm pretty sure he was trying to leave me with a zero, but didn't realize there was no such thing.

From the Rules:

Each rating consists of measurements from 1 to 5 stars

I'm just telling you how it works in the actual code. There are definitely some inconsistencies around, I'll admit that much.

[chapcrap]

Yeah, Doom is correct, Mets is wrong, I'm pretty sure.

If you do not rate something and rate another category, it does not count the one left unrated at all. For evidence of this, look at my ratings:
https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... e=chapcrap

I have 2051 people that have rated me, but each category has less than 2051, because occasionally, I've had people leave out a category.

[Metsfanmax]

DoktorDave

You can do calculations on his ratings to see what's up.

His overall rating is determined by the following. He has 15 ratings equal to 5 (player-averaged). He has one averaged rating = 3.33, and one = 2.66. So his overall rating is (15 * 5 + 3.33 + 2.67) / 17 = 4.76, which rounds up to 4.8. There's no way to get that 4.8 without those zero-ratings having been counted, so the code still works as I thought.

[DoomYoshi]

No, I just calculated the doctor. Dividing the total rating of 243 by 50 (not counting the 0) gives 4.86 or 4.9.
Which means it counts for overall, but not for the category.

chapcrap ratings-killed me.

[Metsfanmax]

No, I just calculated the doctor. Dividing the total rating of 243 by 50 (not counting the 0) gives 4.86 or 4.9.
Which means it counts for overall, but not for the category.

Exactly. And overall rating has the weird quirk that you average each player's ratings first, before you average all the ratings. If that didn't happen (and the zeros didn't count), then the doctor would actually have a 4.7 displayed.

[DoomYoshi]

4.9 you mean.

[chapcrap]

If it was counting for his attitude, his rating would be like 4.5 for it, but it's 4.9, so it's obviously not counting. However, it must be counting for overall, because how are all three categories 4.9 and overall 4.8?

[Metsfanmax]

I wrote something other than what I meant, because admittedly this is a bit confusing. I am not sure the statement above is accurate. Anyway, I don't think it matters whether you look at it as average-of-averages or just summing all the ratings up and dividing by 51, because each average is just a divide-by-3 operation anyway, which can be factored out.

chap: exactly. It doesn't count for the individual ratings categories.