Moderator: Community Team
Nymeria Stark wrote:is that sensible though?
Metsfanmax wrote:Nymeria Stark wrote:is that sensible though?
It is definitely not consistent; not sure about whether it's sensible. We have had this discussion about this particular issue a few times in the past and the general agreement was that although it's kind of messed up, it's not worth fixing.
riskllama wrote:so, if you got 2/5 for gameplay and 0/5 for attitude and the other one(i forget what it is right now), your rating for that particular game would be 2/15? i was always under the assumption that it would just be a 2/5.
???
Nymeria Stark wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:Nymeria Stark wrote:is that sensible though?
It is definitely not consistent; not sure about whether it's sensible. We have had this discussion about this particular issue a few times in the past and the general agreement was that although it's kind of messed up, it's not worth fixing.
if it's hours upon hours of work then i agree, but surely it wouldn't take more than a few minutes?
my knowledge of programming is small and i'm aware that estimate may seem embarrassingly ignorant to someone who knows their shit. then again i've watched mates who study IT do things that seem orders of magnitude more complex in like 20 minutes.
betiko wrote:I didn't know that when you didn t leave full ratings you were actually giving a 0 to the overall rating.
We agree that for a particular field, it s not counted in the average though right? I ve always given 1/1/1 as the worse rating possible when someone had been horrible. So i guess 1/0/0 is actually the worse rating possible?
Metsfanmax wrote:Nymeria Stark wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:Nymeria Stark wrote:is that sensible though?
It is definitely not consistent; not sure about whether it's sensible. We have had this discussion about this particular issue a few times in the past and the general agreement was that although it's kind of messed up, it's not worth fixing.
if it's hours upon hours of work then i agree, but surely it wouldn't take more than a few minutes?
my knowledge of programming is small and i'm aware that estimate may seem embarrassingly ignorant to someone who knows their shit. then again i've watched mates who study IT do things that seem orders of magnitude more complex in like 20 minutes.
It's not about the amount of work, it's that people already know the rating system as it is, this change would involve suddenly re-rating a lot of people all at once and lots of people would probably not be happy about that. And it's also not clear in which direction we should fix it (make 0/5 count for the individual scores too, or don't make 0/5 ever count?).
Nymeria Stark wrote:as ive said, i dont think this is a big issue. i just consider the reasons youve stated for not changing it incredibly weak.
Metsfanmax wrote:Nymeria Stark wrote:as ive said, i dont think this is a big issue. i just consider the reasons youve stated for not changing it incredibly weak.
Perhaps, but ratings system fixes are pretty low on anyone's priority list. So unless there's some reason why this is particularly important, I don't have any interest in spending political capital on it.
Nymeria Stark wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:
It is definitely not consistent; not sure about whether it's sensible. We have had this discussion about this particular issue a few times in the past and the general agreement was that although it's kind of messed up, it's not worth fixing.
if it's hours upon hours of work then i agree, but surely it wouldn't take more than a few minutes?
riskllama wrote:perhaps some kind of announcement is in order? I think a lot of players were under the same assumption I was, eh?
mrswdk wrote:So if someone's really shit, is it possible to rate them 0/15 instead of 3/15? I was under the impression you have to leave at least 1 star for the form to submit.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users