Subject:
|
Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:14:52 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
337 times
|
| |
|
|
I'm curious on why so many of the popular sets receive a "zero" rating.
It just doesn't make any sense. Unless it's a valid reason, these ratings
should be thrown out. Either these people are jealous or
complete morons.
|
|
Message has 8 Replies:
 | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) I couldn't agree more, Ken! My addition to that question would be: why do people rate a set they don't own? If you don't own it, then your rating shouldn't count towards the member rating average because you have no idea what you are truly (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) One person has admitted to rating several sets a 0, but explained that it was due to his misinterpreting the rating system-- he had thought it was the highest score. IIRC he changed his votes. Others (there are reasons to believe) are just (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| "Ken Godawa" <kengod@y-comm.com> wrote in message news:H5pqzu.Mq1@lugnet.com... (...) Where are these ratings taking place? Without seen the rating system mentioned I can say that there is a way to get this rating better. Like IMDb (Internet Movie (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) This has been mentioned before. Generally, this kind of thing is an example of ratings trashing. You like a particular set, but there are 20 sets in front of it. You trash the ratings of the 20 sets by rating them 0 and voila! Your favorite is (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| Hello! (...) As Ben said before I too think there are too many sets rated 100. I rated just my absolute favourites in my collection a "100" (e.g. 6067, 6085) and the absolute bad and superfluous sets a "0" (e.g. 6037). Well, my most favourite sets (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) Can you give an example of one othe "popular sets" to which you refer? I'm just curious to know which ones we're discussing. (...) Perhaps it is a valid reason. I don't think very many folks around here are morons. No moron could survive the (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) Well, anyone actually using these ratings for anything important would throw out outlying votes anyway. Unless they're complete morons 8?) And if they're not using it for anything important, what difference does it make? I see no reason to (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) I just read through the majority of this thread. Here's my take... I tend to regard the set ratings on the Lugnet database as mostly just a curiosity. I don't take them that seriously, partly because I already know what sets *I* like, and (...) (22 years ago, 18-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
