"usefulness", they say...! Ha! >_<

XDXD · Post by **XDXD** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:16 pm

ok, i just read the bottom line at the back of the page of the "most useful commentators".
So, basically...they say that usefulness of the comments is rated according to the number of words per post and the fact that you've posted more than 5 opinions...>,>...is this a joke?!
I mean: they'd better call it "lengthiness", not "usefulness"...!

Isn't there a way for creators to "score" the opinions they're given?

I thought it was working that way!

creators make the video
commentators rate them
creators rate commentators

it's only plain and fair justice!
Who more than the creator himself can estimate how useful a comment is, how it helped him seeing the flaws or the good of him video, or doing it justice or helping him doing better with the videos ?!

BishounenStalker · Post by **BishounenStalker** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:25 pm

Couldn't agree more. Especially when some of the most "useful" commentators can't line up their numerical scores with their comments (I began a thread on that earlier). Or when they completely miss stuff you said in the vid info. We as creators have an option to respond to opinions, but it's not the same thing as officially rating a commentator.

XDXD · Post by **XDXD** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:32 pm

you said:

"Especially when some of the most "useful" commentators can't line up their numerical scores with their comments"

Hmm...you mean commentators who make short reviews are *anyways* rated *low*?

BishounenStalker · Post by **BishounenStalker** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:05 pm

No, what I mean is that a lot of the commentators rated as the most useful have trouble correllating their numerical scores and their comments. Example: they'll give someone a 4 on capture, but state in the capture section of their extremely wordy scoring breakdown that they "couldn't find anything wrong". In that case, why score below average? What I'm saying is that it's not the amount of words that should define usefulness. Because a lot of commentators who are considered useful by this site's rating system are in reality sending mixed signals as in the above example.

KLin · Post by **KLin** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:42 pm

I also agree, many makers have said they agreed with my opinions and that it helped them focus on particular positives and negatives of the AMV that they had not thought of before. You won't find me among most useful reviewers though since I am not super elaborate. Although I am in the list of most opinions.

If you agree that this should be changed, bring it up on the site suggestions board. Although Phade probably won't get around to it anytime soon.

FirestormXIII · Post by **FirestormXIII** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:30 pm

BishounenStalker wrote:Couldn't agree more. Especially when some of the most "useful" commentators can't line up their numerical scores with their comments

Out of curiousity, who in particular that's leaving opinions does this? I'm not asking you to put up names on the forum, you can PM me about it. I'm just wondering who does that.

BishounenStalker wrote:Or when they completely miss stuff you said in the vid info.

Now that's even odder. I, for one, leave the video info open as a reference when I'm writing reviews. But I suppose everyone has their own way of doing things.

And this all reminds me that I need to get back to doing reviews.

iserlohn · Post by **iserlohn** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 6:26 pm

IIRC, the as of yet to be implemented karma system will deal with issues like this. Just think you can play /. mod in the comfort of your own home =)

XDXD · Post by **XDXD** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 6:59 pm

No, what I mean is that [...]a lot of commentators who are considered useful by this site's rating system are in reality sending mixed signals [...]they'll give someone a 4 on capture, but state in the capture section of their extremely wordy scoring breakdown that they "couldn't find anything wrong".

Ah..."Soka...", as they say, in cowboy bebop...^,^

Out of curiousity, who in particular that's leaving opinions does this? I'm not asking you to put up names on the forum, you can PM me about it. I'm just wondering who does that.

Well, for example, me, firestorm...

(er, yes, i'm in the list of the most useful commentators...^_-; [or else, my ancient aka, "xd", is.] )
I did once, "over-rated" a video's sound quality, which has been notified to me by the author, in its reply ("why are you rating my sound so high, if your criticize it so much?!"), and corrected by me (i lowered the mark)...^,^;

Hm...I know this way of doing is not absolutely fair, but...hm...i can't say the marks i'm giving match *only* with the videos i'm reviewing...it also deals with my principles...
I mean: for example, unless it's a video nearly impossible to read, i'd rate the quality of the image as 10...
To be frank, i think that this kind of "criteria" should be scored in a binary way: "readable/not readable"...
Of course, the image quality is a matter of skills in the technical aspect of the "making-videos" job, but it's also a matter of...money.And i refuse to discriminate cheap people. (plus i'm not feeling good enough to give opinions about technical stuff..^.^;...i think the necessary knowledge can only be acquired throughout the whole process of making a vid, and i still have not made any of them...). If i would be given the choice not to rate this aspect of the vid, i'd take it!

I also am reluctant to give a 10-mark in originality...which makes me give a lot of "9-marks"...^.^; (indeed, i think i'll give a ten the day when i'll be sure i'll NEVER find a vid more original than the one i'm rating--that is, bsically: "one day before the end of the world, if i ever come to know the word is ending tomorrow, if i come to have internet at that time, and if i find a video that worths it", or maybe "when i'll have seen all the amvs of the word"...who knows...?)...

Indeed, by the time, i'm wondering if i should or not take the time to review other vids, and if i should "struggle" to have my old aka back.
I was pretty happy to be appreciated, as a reviewer...because, most of the time, i'm reproached to make too long and incomprehensible texts...i thought it was different on AMV org...but if it's because of the number of words i'm using that i'm rated so high, on amv, i think i'd better stop reviewing.
AMV is a wrong place to practice and improve my writing and analysis skills...(i liked it, though!... ;_; )

XDXD · Post by **XDXD** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 7:08 pm

I wish i could give credit to the marks that are given to my reviews...
I think the quantity of word should not interfere with the estimate of the quality of the review....
Come on! Change this, Phade!

I, for one, leave the video info open as a reference when I'm writing reviews.

Well, i always end up doing this but i should think to do so from the start, that's true..^,^

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Sat Feb 01, 2003 7:09 pm

I'm just wondering, WHY DO YOU CARE what a reviewer has as their usefullness rating? It's just a statistic. Being listed as one of the most usefull commenters doesn't give you any special privledges. What would be the purpose of implementing a scoring system to rate the opinions that you recieve?

AnimeMusicVideos.org

"usefulness", they say...! Ha! >_<

"usefulness", they say...! Ha! >_<

...again...

well