Subject:
|
Re: Castle set rating curiosity
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.database
|
Date:
|
Tue, 9 Jan 2001 23:21:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
116 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.castle, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.castle, Franklin W. Cain writes:
> > In lugnet.castle, Bianca Nebab writes:
> > > I was just browsing through the Lugnet set guide.
> > > Lots of the Castle sets (6073, 74, 80, 81, 85 off the top of my head)
> > > have a single "0" rating. Is this the work of a rival theme mercenary,
> > > or does someone really not like these castles?
> >
> > A single ZERO rating? Or a single "50(%)" rating?
> >
> > IIRC, Todd has programmed the ratings to automatically have
> > a "balancing" initial/default rating of "50(%)", which is then
> > added to whatever other "real" ratings are given,
> > and the whole mess is averaged.
> >
> > Isn't this right, Todd?
>
> Yes, there is always a rating of 50 given by the system as a dampener. It's
> virtually impossible to get all the way down to 0 or all the way up to 100,
> by design.
>
> --Todd
I hate to resurrect this thread, but I've also noted another trend which
disturbs me. I have been adding my name to the sets which I own, which means
that I have been cycling through quite a few listings in the set database. I
have run across several themes where a note has been left saying "X-THEME
SUCKS!" I am all for posting notes about a set that you own, positive or
negative, that's how people become informed. However, what I don't like is
having graffiti scrawled a theme. I view the statement quoted above as
graffiti because the author
(1) Does not support his claims by additional comments.
(2) Assumably did not rate the model since there is not "0" vote where all
of the comments were made.
(3) Does not claim to own any of the models where the note was made.
I think it would be helpful to have a small check in place that allows a
LUGNET member to post a note about a model only if they own it, want it or
want to sell it. I find it distasteful to rummage through reference
materials and see that type of defacing. I think that it reflects badly on
LUGNET to have those comments available to general public. It might be time
to wash the walls somehow.
Just my $.02...
-Duane
I have a mental image of myself looking through an archive viewing the notes
of Copernicus only to find "Astronomy Sucks!" scrawled across the page.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Castle set rating curiosity
|
| (...) This is inherently a problem with any kind of open forum for evaluations. It is an interesting problem. I feel that eventually, for the web as a whole to be useful, there will have to be some kind of system which allows anyone to rate and (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.admin.database)
| | | Member details in set database moved to subpages
|
| (...) I don't like it either, especially when it shows up right in your face on a set DB page. For reasons of server load and the above, I've moved the notes and buy/sell/own listings to subpages that you can click up if you want to see them. It (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Database
|
|
|
|
|
|
