I think we need a "no star/comment at this time" rating

[BasharOfTheAges]

As an example, if you want to download all the VCA videos then every 10 downloads you gotta stop, give totally bullshit stars to videos you haven't watched yet, then continue on. Since there's a couple hundred videos in the VCA that means you'll have to interrupt downloading about 20 times to do this.

In future VCAs, non-donators will have streaming access to the semi-finalists. In this case, they could rate the videos as they watch them.

Streaming queue? Now this sounds like a plan.

Streaming quality (and, y'know, not being able to save them) for VCA voting... that's a bad idea - a temporary lift of the "you have too many unstarred videos" flag would be a hell of a lot more useful.

[Corran]

Streaming queue?

Not really a queue. >_>

[8bit_samurai]

I haven't read godix's or Corran's post yet. I was going to reply this morning but I didn't have enough time.

Are we certain everyone accepts 3 as being devoid of commentary? I don't want the editor to think I gave them a 3/5 when I actually gave them an N/A.

Your idea for a submit all button is intriguing but doesn't solve the above issue. Three out of five a score, if I feel that I don't to give a video any score at all what am I supposed to do? Choose a three and then take the time for every video I don't want to score to leave a QC that says "3 = No Comment"? Would the editor even understand the message?

It seemed to me it was something that you were already using. I can kinda see why you don’t want to score a video; however, I think I've gotten too used of the system that I almost want to call you lazy or untrue to yourself when it comes to rating a video. But you seem like the type who’d give an OP if you feel a video does truly need a rating.

I can imagine a “Zero Star” when it comes to star rating. A “Star” that does not affect the star score where the viewer thinks the video isn’t interesting enough to give a good or bad scoring. It would leave the star rating system to those who actually give a damn about it for the most part, but I don’t think there are enough of us to keep those who are too “lenient” with the system in check. It would make genuinely good videos harder to find amongst the subjectively crappy and overrated videos. Those who give 3s instead of 1s or 2s may not think they’re making a big difference, but if there are enough of those people, then yeah, you kinda do. Not much, but to me, a 3.61 makes a big difference than a 3.85. I would not think twice about 3.85 video, but I would have to think twice about the 3.61 video if whether or not the source is worth it. It may work as a Donator’s option, considering the small number of donators (I’d imagine) compared to the total number of active members who download videos everyday. And considering donators donate, they’d might be more mature about it. I dunno. Just a thought.

[Kionon]

My response tone is neutral, polite, and conciliatory in the following post. The internet makes this difficult, so I am specifying this upfront.

Logistics are a major issue. Related database queries, the three different implementations of the rating interface, and the code that validates and updates star ratings would need to be changed. From here it gets tricky. The existing star related code spread throughout the site may or may not need updating. The only way to know for sure is thorough testing. So it is more like "the system might allow it, I can program that, but the cost/benefit ratio does not appeal to me so I'm not going to program that even if Phade was cool with it."

So you think that the logisitics are a major obstacle. I get that, and I respect it. If you think that it is really too difficult, then as stated, I understand.

Maybe not your point in your reply specifically to Zarxrax, but my point is that the programmers will program what we choose to and that we are under no obligation to program X feature. This entire thread I've felt like you've approached the issue like "The system is stupid, change it, now." and "I'm right, you're wrong."

It is hard to demand the system be changed now when I don't have the power to do it. As for thinking the system is stupid, I do. As for thinking I am right that the system is stupid, I do. I do approach the issue that way. Why make a suggestion I don't back fully to the hilt? There are few issues I care about when it comes to the the site as I do this one. I'm going to make sure my feelings on the matter are crystal clear.

And I do as much for the site as I can. If allowed to, I would do more. I have offered on several occasions. I've offered to serve as a mod. I've offered to donate specific amounts if asked for them, as opposed to just my standard $12 a year. I've written stickies, agitated for the mac forum (and thanks guys, you do rock, we got it) and did up the tutorials. I continue to do research in areas I personally don't even use. All because I take my promise seriously. If you need help, I'll step up.

Otohiko gave a response that I completely agree with, in which he compared star ratings to a weather vane rather than some kind of precision instrument, but you dismiss it with "Does it? Does it, really? I think not." and then go on about how the system causes inaccurate ratings despite that being an inherently implied side effect in Otohiko's post.

Actually, I flat out missed the implication. Rather, I thought Oto had explicitly said they were some kind of precision instrument. If I missed that and responded incorrectly, I apologise.

I try posting to let you know that there are people that give star ratings as intended because the system is compulsory and you dismiss my point simply based on loosely related word choice.

Word choice is very, very important when we lack tone and body language. You said you didn't think hard about it, you went with your instinct. I said that I did not know one person who sat down, and really thought about the star rating they were giving. By your own admission, you don't do that. You go with your gut, immediately. This is not, as I understand it, semantic quibbling. I am looking for a person who puts some deep thought into choosing a star rating, and takes time to do so, and so far, I don't think I have met anyone who does. I am not saying your gut is less valuable, I am just saying it is immediate.

It is frustrating and makes me and others less likely to help you.

See above. I am not in any way attacking you, or belittling you, are ignoring the great work you've so far done. And as stated twice now, if this is a technical issue you just don't feel is worth the trouble, so be it. When I choose a position, and post about it, then I defend it to the hilt. Most things that the site does that I disagree with are just not worth that kind of devotion. I think this is. So I choose my battles. Don't take anything I say as personal, or as impugning the great work done elsewhere. I just truly believe the system, as a compulsory one, is broken, if not outright misguided. You may disagree, and you have the right to ignore my suggestions, but please don't take offense at my attempt to make the site better within my ability to do so.

How the editor interprets the number will vary from person to person. I personally recommend using a 3 because I view 3 as being indifferent.

So do I. I just worry that it will be misinterpreted, thus I thought a clarification in the system might be nice.

Corran, I suggest because I care. I respond because I care. If I come off as being very strong handed through the bluntness of my word choice, take it only as I really, really believe in the goal I am arguing for. Nothing personal in it; just business.

Serious Business. |:

[mirkosp]

Kio... how about you just type in the QC "I'm rating this 3 out 5 because I don't feel like expressing my opinion and consider it to be an indifferent rating"?

[Kionon]

Kio... how about you just type in the QC "I'm rating this 3 out 5 because I don't feel like expressing my opinion and consider it to be an indifferent rating"?

I mentioned this above. I could. But it makes a slow process even slower. I'm not really opposed to it as a personal solution, but it obviously isn't a global solution.

[Panky]

I thought the same way a few times, and I don't download too many AMV's that often. I usually had some problems delivering stars rating because I would forget which video it was (probably deleted some time ago) or maybe I really couldn't get to see again the video in that specific moment; I have to give a 3 stars to keep on downloading, though. It feels misleading when the main purpose of the system itself is to give a general and somehow accurate opinion about a video.
About implementing it, I don't really know too much about it, I guess it could be a little big of a deal checking compatibility with the system as it is right now. Maybe adding 0 (or nothing) to the sum of star ratings given and not adding 1 to the # of people that rated could do the job, but again, I can't be sure how it works out behind the curtains.

[mirkosp]

Kio... how about you just type in the QC "I'm rating this 3 out 5 because I don't feel like expressing my opinion and consider it to be an indifferent rating"?

I mentioned this above. I could. But it makes a slow process even slower. I'm not really opposed to it as a personal solution, but it obviously isn't a global solution.

So like... how about instead of giving the donators the ability to not star rate, giving them a check to automatically give 3+the comment above? Stars would still be given as wished by some, and others that complain about the system won't have to go through the hassle. That should be a nice compromise.

[Kionon]

So like... how about instead of giving the donators the ability to not star rate, giving them a check to automatically give 3+the comment above? Stars would still be given as wished by some, and others that complain about the system won't have to go through the hassle. That should be a nice compromise.

I would agree to that. However, can Corran, or would Corran be willing to, code that?

[JaddziaDax]

I used to put thought into star ratings, then I started feeling that there was no point..