cena-rules wrote:Now, on the topic of feedback that was brought up, it lead me to thinking just how faceless this rating system is. Now they got rid of the feedback system because "it was being abused." Well if you ask me so is the rating system. The ratings suggest that you should rate 3* as an average and not many people do this, therefore arent they abusing the system?
To truly rate everyone reasonably means not only remember details of games I just finished, but ALSO going back and look at any other games I have played with that person. To do that required me to game search the person and myself, then click on the game and go back and
do it again for each and every game I have played. This just takes way too much time.
Almost no one rates all 3's right now. Those who do are generally thought of as jerks, because most everyone rates higher. I used to rate everyone all 4's if they played decently, then would rate all 5's if I played them again.
To do that, though, I have to go back and look at every game with anyone I have rated before. Again, when I finished around 20 a day, that took way too much time.
Now I rate all 5's unless someone is a jerk. I still have to go back and check the half-yellow stars (other than those I remember) because I still occasionally come across someone I rated differently before. In time, I will ONLY be rating new people.
Unless the system changes
cena-rules wrote:Also, feedback allowed for a more personal touch and a comment on the game. An example of this is one of my feedbacks
"Cena played his turns in a timely fashion and he played them well. He's a good player and deserves positive feedback that recognises his skill. Well played, Cena!"
This is straight to the point and gives more information than some little tags and a few stars. Its personal and comes from the players heart. Yes it was abused but all systems are going to be abused. It would be very easy to just have a feedback mod that sorts out issues and can issue feedback bans of 10,20,50,100 games up to permanent. The player would still be allowed to recieve feedback of course.
CC itself is turning into a faceless company and I expect this thread to be locked but hey ho
Bring Back feedback
FTS
--cena
I, too liked the old feedback. I think a better solution would have been to just NOT MODERATE any but extreme foul language, racism, etc. I mean, no one cared about 1-2 bad comments. Even the best, nicest players got them. We figured the person giving the rating was the jerk, not the one getting the rating! When you started getting 20 or so.. and particularly, when the comments were specific (excepting maybe someone deadbeat a bunch of games for some serious issue, like being in the hospital, etc.). As you well know, mods are only volunteers. What volunteer wants to deal with complaint after complaint?
However, there were too many people who plain complained about any negative comments, who seriously think they are supposed to get nothing but perfect comments and ratings. Some of that is just society. We have generations now who are used to "Above average" = average. Some of it is, well, some people are just whiners and poor sports. They see fault in others, but not themselves. Sadly, those people are often the biggest complainers and ruined it for everyone else.
Personally, I don't think there is any real agreement on what the purpose of ratings is anyway. Some people want to rate skill, saying rank doesn't address it (true to a point, but individual rating cannot fix that because individual ratings are too subjective.
Some people want to give "kudos" to people who play well. The wall was supposed to be a place for that, but most regular players pretty much ignore that. Since anyone can edit their own wall, leaving good comments up seems a bit like bragging (at least to me) and other comments ... well, why would anyone leave a bad comment up, particularly if it represents 1 person out of 1000's view. I mean, out of several thousand different players, I have only met a handful who were jerks or considered myself to be one. I might like to see a tag that says "good sport", etc, but really -- how many of us even really read the ratings for other people? If we do, its hard to use that to exclude or select people for games. Foe list and friends lists are about it.
I believe what people really want to know is if someone is worth playing. BUT that means too many different things to different people. The current system does not even take into account some things that used to be dividers for a lot of people -- language, for example. I mean, maybe you don't mind a few f-bombs, but others do. Right now, the only way to know of someone swears or not is to play them or look through their old games. The first sort of defeats the purpose. The second takes a lot of time.
