| |
In lugnet.castle, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> > http://members.lugnet.com/polls/ballots/?n=80
>
> One other request: no ratings trashing. By that I mean please don't
> delibrately go through giving everything a zero and your favorite a 10 just
> to make it look good. I can tell when you have done it (and since I'm
> posting this, guess what someone has done).
This is indeed a problem.
I noticed this quite a while back with set ratings, too. Someone went
through and rated just about all the classic castle sets "0". Now, given
that there were at least 50 votes or so for each set, it didn't affect the
overall numbers *that* much-- BUT, it did affect their placement in the "top
100 sets" lists. 0's lowered the score enough to take them out of rank with
where they 'should' have been.
Suggestion:
For every N votes received, remove the highest and lowest vote.
Theoretically, it won't affect the score too much if votes are spread in a
bell curve, as they *should* be, but it *will* affect scores when votes are
cast sporatically, such as the occasional intentional "0" (or even a "10",
although this seems to be less common).
I actually tried this at the time (a few months after 6067 was re-released)
with set rankings, with different values of N-- and oddly enough, 6067 was
ranked #1 more than with any other set for any value of N tried (I tried
something like 10 values of N? I forget offhand). And (at the time), 6067
had been ranked something like #20 or something, when it should have been at
least within the top 3, if not #1.
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Rate the factions
|
| (...) delibrately go through giving everything a zero and your favorite a 10 just to make it look good. I can tell when you have done it (and since I'm posting this, guess what someone has done). Bruce (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.castle)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
