Except that's not true and thus your point is invalidCaTaClYsM wrote:doesn't matter how it gets averaged if everyone is getting nothing but ones and tens.
But there's no point complaining about it. Dw's right, they didn't want the review system to be accurate. It's not supposed to be the average of the scores given for each section of the video. It's supposed to be the average of the review count, or the popularity of those scores. No one uses the review system to look at things like capture or action sync - they use it to see which vids are more popular. It was meant to be a popularity contest, and that's what it is now - so finally, after years, it is just what they wanted. An inaccurate representation of the average of the scores given (those evil 'raw averages') but an entirely accurate representation of the popularity of those scores (by averaging how many reviews give the exact same score). And really, who cares what the actual quality of the video is if it has lots of reviews? If you want to get vids based on raw scores, you can just skim through your 'Opinions given' page. That's not what the top 10 is for. It's to show people which vids are the most watched and consistently liked, so new members will know which ones to review (thus keeping things just the way they are). For fluctuation, you have the star scale (though you can always sort it by 1000 to get the unmoving vids). For constant proven popular vids, you have to top 10.CaTaClYsM wrote:the rating system is seriously flawed.
I'm wondering if it ever will. Givin the video has 658 ops as of 1:49 PM Central time, it has either one of two things:CaTaClYsM wrote:I think the bigger question should be, when is that video going to be dethroned?
Except it shouldn;t be a problem with this, because videos that stay at the top like Euphoria will be gone from that list completely, since the idea is that a video will not STAY on this list for longer than 2 months. It is just for new videos, so the new "system" of rating them based on lowering tha average until more reviews are given, will only succeed in making the better Newer videos come up at top, and probably stay up there for 2 months if it is a realy good video, then will be moved to the all time top 10, and off that list, for the next good video to populate it. I personally think its better this way. It has the good points of the current top 10 (being more acurate), minus some of the bad points (in that it being static)Arigatomyna wrote:And that's not even taking into account how low the new videos will 'scored' once they create a separate section for the 3 reviews or less videos (the 'new video' top 10). Imagine, right now videos with an average of 8 ops have their scores lowered by a point or more (compared to videos with 13 reviews of the exact same 'raw average' score) - the idea of that being done to new videos with 3 reviews is just cruel. But that's the way they want it, so that's the way it should be.CaTaClYsM wrote:the rating system is seriously flawed.
Good question. I know it's a popularity contest because AD (and DW - a supporter of the new top 10 scoring system) have said so in many past threads concerning the top 10 list and the vids that 'top' that list. According to them, it has always been just a popularity contest. So why this pretense at accuracy by having different sections to give 'scores' to? I have no idea why. They could always just lengthen the 'top favorite vid' list. Or do what Phade wanted to do with the star scale - have a pass/fail 'score' for reviews that can be counted to determine the spot on the 10 list. I'm sure even those people who don't know how to 'score' videos can decide for themselves if a vid passes or fails. It would be much more accurate if every reviewer were basing the 'score' on the same thing - 'liked' or 'didn't like'. Simple, consistent, and less of a mess with the numbers.CaTaClYsM wrote:If it's supposed to be a popularity contest why not rank it by favorites instead?
[/size]