Keeper of Hellfire wrote:If the op system is intended to be a help for the creators to improve, how helpfull are straight 10's?
"Keep it up, you're doing great."
Encouragement is helpful for those with low self esteem, motivating them to keep pushing for that 'perfect' response.
The op system might be 'intended' to help creators improve, but it's not used that way and never has been. If we wanted creators to read ops and improve, we'd regulate the people giving ops so only those who give good advice can review videos. It's a feedback system, watch the vid and tell me what you thought. That might not have been the intention, but that's what it is. And until they regulate who can leave reviews, that's what it will be.
My main problem with changing the way reviews are 'counted' is that we're just changing the system and ignoring the people using that system. It isn't a question of whether or not perfect scores should be possible with the current system. If the reviewers used the system properly, this wouldn't be an issue. We can cut out the 'all 10s' to make it more likely that the average reviewer will be ignored when he says he loved a video, but that won't stop him from loving a video we don't think deserves that love. We have to teach him not to love that video, teach him to be like us, a better judge who knows all10s means 'perfect' and not 'I saw nothing wrong with it.' We have to teach him that if he has nothing bad to say, he shouldn't say anything at all. Unless it's a video we think is perfect, in which case he's being a proper reviewer when he gives it all 10s.
The way reviews are used now - in the top 10 list - fits with the way reviews are given. When someone gives all 10s, saying he loves it and that he found nothing wrong with it, that video is marked as being 'loved.' And so it is compared to other videos on the 'most loved list'. The more people who love it, the more we *know* it is loved, so the higher it is ranked on that list (referring to the weight put on the number of reviews rather than the actual average). Reviews break down into a 'love/hate' score, with some general middleground that doesn't really matter in the long run since those won't make it onto the list. The top 10 list is a ranking for the 'loved' videos. It's the same way convention-winning videos are decided. It makes sense for there to be a list like that on the org.
I don't see the need to change the review system because it functions perfectly as what it is - a feedback system telling you if your work is loved or hated (or so blegh it gets a 'i don't know' instead of a yes/no). The only problem with the current system is the 'multiple-account' spammers, and we do try to crack down on that when we see it.
If we want a ranking system of 'good' versus 'bad,' then we need an entirely different system. We need a system that is judged and run by people capable of telling 'good' from 'bad.' It can't be open to the uneducated masses, and it has to be regulated to make sure the judges are competent and unbiased.
If you want to turn the current op system into that 'good vs bad' system, you have to turn the people reviewing into proper judges. I can't see that happening, even if we made classes to educate reviewers and gave them licenses once they pass. It would take too long, and the benefits aren't worth it. It would be easier and quicker to make a panel of qualified judges and create a different system to run alongside the current one.
