[Site] Normalize Player Ratings (Average = 0)

[Metsfanmax]

Can we take another look at this? I did particularly like this suggestion.

[temporos]

Can we take another look at this? I did particularly like this suggestion.

I think it was pretty much shot down by one of the mods, because he likes the status-quo.

[stahrgazer]

btw, you could do the same "equalizer" thing with the current system by having the system default to 3 *** instead of "not-counted if the player doesn't feel like hitting the buttons."

The idea is theoretically good. The problem with this new idea and the current ratings system is that it involves subjectivity. You can't regulate against human choice, and you can't regulate the reasons for the choice. It's human nature: you're less likely to rate someone you are friends with with less than the highest, even if you know that friend is not as good a player as others you've played.

[MeDeFe]

btw, you could do the same "equalizer" thing with the current system by having the system default to 3 *** instead of "not-counted if the player doesn't feel like hitting the buttons."

Yes, I think this was already pointed out, in the end it doesn't matter which it is as long as the current absolutely fucked up system is changed.

The idea is theoretically good. The problem with this new idea and the current ratings system is that it involves subjectivity. You can't regulate against human choice, and you can't regulate the reasons for the choice. It's human nature: you're less likely to rate someone you are friends with with less than the highest, even if you know that friend is not as good a player as others you've played.

What you're pointing out is exactly what the proposed system would counteract.
In other words: What you're pointing out IS a problem for the current system, it would NOT be a noticeable problem for the proposed system.

[pmchugh]

Good suggestion, current ratings are only useful for identifying complete idiots and making noobs feel bad.

[Woodruff]

Concise description:

• Migrate from a "1 to 5" star system to a "-2 to +2" star system.

Specifics/Details:

• Right now: 1 is bad, 5 is awesome.
• Migrate to: -2 is bad, +2 is awesome.
• Migration should be retroactive.
• Lack of a rating should be counted as a 0 or "average" rating.

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

• Right now, the average player rating is about 4.8 stars: well above the 3 star "average."
• If the scale is adjusted such that "average" is 0, anything below average is negative, and anything above average is positive, the average player rating will naturally stabilize around 0.
• If a player does not wish to leave a rating for his opponents after a match, it counts as a 0 or "average" rating.
• This proposed system will encourage a more intuitive and reliable measure of a player's attitude, gameplay, and sociability.
• Players would be compelled to leave a rating only if they wish to leave an above or below average rating for another player.
• Players aren't left jaded when someone leaves them a less-than-5-star rating (i.e., everybody wins).

What we really should migrate to is a pass/fail system. Up or down. Air Force officer recommendations used to be based on what was equivalent to the "5-star" system, and it failed precisely as this one has - with rating inflation. But some time ago, the Air Force moved to the up/down or pass/fail system and it is far more fair than otherwise, and you don't see the inflation you did previously. It was far less subjective.

[stahrgazer]

What you're pointing out is exactly what the proposed system would counteract.
In other words: What you're pointing out IS a problem for the current system, it would NOT be a noticeable problem for the proposed system.

Yes it would still be a problem; players would still rate their "less than zero" friends as +2's (instead of +5's) and people they decide not to like as -2's (instead of 1 to 3) regardless of game skill or any problem in a particular game.

[Metsfanmax]

What you're pointing out is exactly what the proposed system would counteract.
In other words: What you're pointing out IS a problem for the current system, it would NOT be a noticeable problem for the proposed system.

Yes it would still be a problem; players would still rate their "less than zero" friends as +2's (instead of +5's) and people they decide not to like as -2's (instead of 1 to 3) regardless of game skill or any problem in a particular game.

It's trivial to point out that ratings are subjective. It has nothing to do with the value of this suggestion.

[JoshyBoy]

I fail to see the point of this suggestion, it seems like it's just people being pedantic.

[Joodoo]

If we're asking for something like +1/-1 to a person's rating then we're just going back and forth between the original feedback system and current ratings system, because the feedback format was (# of positive feedback - # of negative feedback).
A slight tweak to how this should work may be better.

[Metsfanmax]

I fail to see the point of this suggestion, it seems like it's just people being pedantic.

You fail to see that the current rating system is completely meaningless, given that something like 90% of the average ratings fall between 4.5 and 5.0?

[MeDeFe]

I fail to see the point of this suggestion, it seems like it's just people being pedantic.

The current system is not working because the ratings are hugely inflated. Implementing this suggestion would go a very long way towards solving that.

That's the point.

[JoshyBoy]

I fail to see the point of this suggestion, it seems like it's just people being pedantic.

You fail to see that the current rating system is completely meaningless, given that something like 90% of the average ratings fall between 4.5 and 5.0?

No, I see that. I could have told you that. What I fail to see, is how the proposed changes fix it.

The old feedback system was great (and I really miss it ), apart from the one problem of moderating it.

[JoshyBoy]

I fail to see the point of this suggestion, it seems like it's just people being pedantic.

The current system is not working because the ratings are hugely inflated. Implementing this suggestion would go a very long way towards solving that.

That's the point.

Which specific suggestion are we talking about here?

[pmchugh]

The idea in the OP helps to fix two current problems with the ratings system but has 1 major flaw.

1. New players find it hard to get a decent rating as one bad rating drags their score down. Their score will take less of a hit from initial bad ratings as they are getting far more ratings at average in the beggining.

2. Players are rated too highly, this point has already been argued.

The problem is that people simply do no rate enough to make it viable. Think of someone like magleplunka or highlander attack, with thousands of games and such a low percentage of people rating it is almost certain their rating would be like 0 or +/-0.1