Subject:
|
Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 17 Nov 2002 21:27:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
527 times
|
| |
|
|
"Allan Bedford" <ExpertBuilder-DELETE-TO-REPLY@apotome.com> wrote in message
news:H5qnsF.2ru@lugnet.com...
<snipe>
> I would say there are a number of non-moronic reasons that someone might
> rate a set a zero. But in the overall scheme of things, I'm not sure it's
> creating a problem. Two zeros for some of these sets really doesn't • reduce
> the overall rating that much when many of the other votes are 100.
>
> I'm still curious though, what do you see as a solution? It's o.k. to
> criticize (trust me, I'm an expert) but it is also appropriate in a case
> like this to offer an alternative solution. Any thoughts on how to • rectify
> the "zero problem"?
>
> All the best,
> Allan B.
Good post. I agree that some people over rate sets. But when the majority
of the ratings of a set are either 100 or 90 then I don't see how that same
set
can receive a 0. I would bet that those who rate a popular set a 0 don't
own that set. If they did, I would like to read why that person rated it a
0
in the comments section.
I would like to see a system where the top rating and bottom rating are
thrown out.
Similar to what is done in diving and ice skating scores. And depending on
how many
total ratings a set gets will determine how many of the top and bottom
ratings are thrown out.
Ken
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) I haven't read to the end of this thread yet, but some of my thoughts after reading a bunch: Throwing out the highest and lowest score might not really help since then it would just mean two people would have to decide to trash a set or theme. (...) (22 years ago, 18-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) Interesting list. A wide cross-section of themes, from train to space and from pirates to a new sculpture. Not one of them has received more than two zeros. That doesn't seem quite enough to cause the set to be delisted as a potential Legends (...) (22 years ago, 17-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
