[09-Jun-2008] Ratings & Medals

[Mr_Adams]

thanks for nothing punk. Nice ratings ya leave me bitch, i'll smoke your ass anytime in this game. You suck

This is what I get for leaving somebody 11/15 stars. This is why the new rating system sucks.

and then

my fairplay, attendance and attitude were excellent, f*ck you

[jiminski]

thanks for nothing punk. Nice ratings ya leave me bitch, i'll smoke your ass anytime in this game. You suck

This is what I get for leaving somebody 11/15 stars. This is why the new rating system sucks.

and then

my fairplay, attendance and attitude were excellent, f*ck you

well i hope you gave him a 5 for Attitude, the fella is a charmer!

[Mr_Adams]

I gave him a four. If I play him again, I'm changing it to a 0

[azezzo]

We hear you guys, don't worry. Stay tuned and perhaps we can craft a system that fits everyone's needs and wants.


--Andy

thanks for taking us seriously

[Orwell]

So, I am against the change (as I stated about 40 posts ago) because I do not think we can quantify what these ratings mean - Personally, I found a method of feedback that was both consistent and specific whether positive or negative (I am not a fan of neutral).
After a couple weeks of this rating system, I think I understand even better now why I am against it: I consider a 5 rating is average and anything less to be "flawed" - basically, I can evaluate other players starting at 5 and deduct from there as I see fit.

Now, if I could make a hybrid of this system and the old, and CC wanted it to be a rating system - then make the first criteria to be either positive or negative and then a rating system of 1-5. That is, at the very least, quantifiable.

[Trouserpants]

Wow, I got my first retaliatory rating today for anyone who thought the system disallowed it. The guy obviously knew I wasn't happy with him and that I was going to rate him lowly, so he whacked me with 1 stars all round pre-emptivly. I did nothing wrong in the game. Brilliant.

[VermiciousDad]

Besides for my recommendation to drop the lowest and highest rating, I also think that some verbage should be required. I am getting ratings from guys that slam my "fair play" and I would love to know why...

Keep up the good work!

[jiminski]

Wow, I got my first retaliatory rating today for anyone who thought the system disallowed it. The guy obviously knew I wasn't happy with him and that I was going to rate him lowly, so he whacked me with 1 stars all round pre-emptivly. I did nothing wrong in the game. Brilliant.

if you forget it exists, it is much more calming.

[bayou]

This just gives the ability for a player pissed off because you beat him to rate you low without having to explain it.
And we have no chance of calling the player on it because there is no place for feedback.

[jiminski]

This just gives the ability for a player pissed off because you beat him to rate you low without having to explain it.
And we have no chance of calling the player on it because there is no place for feedback.

I think i agree.. and with a little tweak i.e. perhaps the addition of Comment/feedback? the system may be improved.

Come and give your input and have a vote if you like: Community Moderated Comment Forum

[Mustapha Mond]

It's official. Except for the one tournament I'm in, I will not be joining any more games and I will not renew my membership until this crap rating systems goes away.

Yet AGAIN, I had a private give me a 1-star rating in a trips game (2530661) for "fair play". What can I say? We played well and so did they. At one point, they actually had the upper hand, but we executed well as a team and turned it around. In what bizarro alternate universe does that not constitute "fair play"???

The ratings are COMPLETELY useless if they contain ratings like that. With the old system, if someone gave a negative, a) they had to explain themselves and b) the other person got a chance to respond. It was transparent.

Frankly, I'd pay a couple of bucks more on my membership to help fund a moderator for the old feedback system if that's what it takes.

[azezzo]

It's official. Except for the one tournament I'm in, I will not be joining any more games and I will not renew my membership until this crap rating systems goes away.

Yet AGAIN, I had a private give me a 1-star rating in a trips game (2530661) for "fair play". What can I say? We played well and so did they. At one point, they actually had the upper hand, but we executed well as a team and turned it around. In what bizarro alternate universe does that not constitute "fair play"???

The ratings are COMPLETELY useless if they contain ratings like that. With the old system, if someone gave a negative, a) they had to explain themselves and b) the other person got a chance to respond. It was transparent.

Frankly, I'd pay a couple of bucks more on my membership to help fund a moderator for the old feedback system if that's what it takes.

I completely agree, i too would be willing to pay a couple of bucks more to improve this site.
And if most people were honest about how much time they spend on this site, then no one should complain about a couple of dollars more. Right now as it stands we are paying $2.08 per month to belong to this mostly wonderful site. Thats a whole lot cheaper than porn or gambling online.

[AndyDufresne]

We hear you, we do. We've got some ideas to help craft a better system that serves your wants and our needs. We want to keep everyone happy, so we're focusing extra effort on it all.


--Andy

[bayou]

It's official. Except for the one tournament I'm in, I will not be joining any more games and I will not renew my membership until this crap rating systems goes away.

Yet AGAIN, I had a private give me a 1-star rating in a trips game (2530661) for "fair play". What can I say? We played well and so did they. At one point, they actually had the upper hand, but we executed well as a team and turned it around. In what bizarro alternate universe does that not constitute "fair play"???

The ratings are COMPLETELY useless if they contain ratings like that. With the old system, if someone gave a negative, a) they had to explain themselves and b) the other person got a chance to respond. It was transparent.

Frankly, I'd pay a couple of bucks more on my membership to help fund a moderator for the old feedback system if that's what it takes.

Its happening the same in reverse also, Mustapha Mond. I beat a high ranked player and get low stars for fairness? Fairness? I've never played an unfair game here. Never. Just because I didn't use the same tactics as he would, he gets pissed. With this system I get rudeness in chat and low rating. Before this I had 1 neg and over 100 positives.

[Hound]

With this system I get rudeness in chat and low rating. Before this I had 1 neg and over 100 positives.

Good point. This system seems to provide less of an incentive for good behavior. Under the feedback system most players liked to avoid negatives, but if it's all just stars they'll even out over time so going off on someone for no good reason might become more common.