Subject:
|
Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 19 Nov 2002 13:46:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
492 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Benjamin Whytcross writes:
> To take the 5 0's / 5 100's a little further, how about only including
> ratings in the calculation for those people who actually own the set...that
> way those who don't rate it are considering it a pass-able set, those who do
> rate it either own it and so they have a credible opinion of the set, or
> don't own it, and so can't really rate it (after all, how do you rate a set
> which you haven't personally built, and so had a chance to consider the
> 'functions' of the set and/or the parts used and how they are used.) [by all
> means let everyone rate them, but only consider ratings from owners of the set.]
That is just silly, I have built a 10022 by myself but I do not own the set
(I was at a friend's place). I know what it looks like, how it is
constructed, the pieces used, etc... I can make an educated decision about
it. Also, what you propose is forcing us to say if we own a set or not. Fine
then, if I want to give my opinion and have it count, I can lie and say I
own every set.
> To add to this, you could also require the average rating by a person over
> all sets they have to have to be within a certain range. You're giving your
> opinion of a set against something, after all. Alternatively, calculate for
> the user what their average rating for all sets is, and then downgrade the
> weighting of their ratings accordingly.
> ie. if all sets are rated at 100%, then they're considering all the sets to
> have equal value, so downgrade to an equivalent 50% in calculations, or if
> half are 100% and others unranked, then downgrade to 75% and 25%
This I disagree with this because I do not have a tendency to buy and rate
sets that in my opinion merit 10% or less (Galidor for example), but I would
buy a Galaxy Explorer, Alpha 1 Rocket Base, Deep Freeze Defender, etc... if
they came at the right price (all of which get a 100% from me).
>
> Anyway, just my 2 cents,
>
> Benjamin Whytcross
That is my two pennies,
Jude
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
| (...) To take the 5 0's / 5 100's a little further, how about only including ratings in the calculation for those people who actually own the set...that way those who don't rate it are considering it a pass-able set, those who do rate it either own (...) (22 years ago, 19-Nov-02, to lugnet.general)
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
