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

[Kionon]

[16:20] <Kionon> I FUCKING HATE STAR RATINGS
[16:20] <Kionon> Jesus Christ
[16:21] <Kionon> If I don't want to comment on a fucking video, that includes giving it any kind of star rating, so I shouldn't have to be made to do it at all.
[16:21] <Kionon> Jesus fuck.
[16:22] <Kionon> i just give everyone threes anyway
[16:22] <Kionon> absolutely no fucking purpose to it
[16:22] * simofc90 has quit (Ping timeout)
[16:22] <yok0> but a 1 is so much easier
[16:22] <yok0> why would you do that?!
[16:22] <Kionon> Three is neutral.
[16:23] <Kionon> If I like a video, I will tell the editor.
[16:24] <Kionon> If I don't like the video, I will tell the editor.
[16:24] <Kionon> If I just don't care, I have NOTHING TO SAY.
[16:24] <Kionon> NOTHING.
[16:24] <Kionon> NO GODDAMNED STARS
[16:24] <Kionon> NOTHING
[16:25] <Kionon> Making me choose a star rating is tantamount to forcing me to express myself in a way I do not want to.
[16:25] <OropherZ|SO4> i have to agree
[16:25] <Kionon> Very anti-artistic.
[16:25] <OropherZ|SO4> 'you cannot download anymore until you have...'
[16:25] <OropherZ|SO4> annoys me
[16:25] <OropherZ|SO4> + i cbf streaming any vids of star ratings
[16:25] <OropherZ|SO4> not to mention you end up duplicating star ratings for streamed vids
[16:26] <Kionon> I'd be okay with a button that says "I have no comment on this video."
[16:26] <Kionon> I think I should have that right.

Potty mouth aside, I really do feel that being forced to give a star rating when I want to remain silent on a video is really... well... kinda being a bully, Org. If I don't wish to express myself on a given video, why should I feel I have to? Now, I realise there may be logistical reasons for limiting downloads, but in that case, why not just give me a button that says "no comment?" I'd rather click that ten times on my page than give everyone threes just to get it out of the way. Is there any way to implement a "no comment" option?

[BurningLeaves]

Sorry Kio but I disagree, alot of people get no feedback at all from their vids and that is what I think separates the org the most from other sites out there. Granted a star rating isn't the most reliable method of determining how well your video went over but you can use it for a general ball park range. Unless someone doesn't care and just gives all 3's =[ For people who don't get alot of opinions, or don't get replies/post in the announcement forum a star rating is the best you're going to get. Not many people are like you and put forth effort in the announcement forum and other places to tell the editor what they thought of a video, so forcing them to leave a star rating is really the best way to bring some small amount of feedback back to the editor.

[Kionon]

Sorry Kio but I disagree, alot of people get no feedback at all from their vids and that is what I think separates the org the most from other sites out there. Granted a star rating isn't the most reliable method of determining how well your video went over but you can use it for a general ball park range. Unless someone doesn't care and just gives all 3's =[ For people who don't get alot of opinions, or don't get replies/post in the announcement forum a star rating is the best you're going to get. Not many people are like you and put forth effort in the announcement forum and other places to tell the editor what they thought of a video, so forcing them to leave a star rating is really the best way to bring some small amount of feedback back to the editor.

And I disagree that the editor should be interested in taking seriously any forced communication. I refuse to upload to local because of star ratings and QCs. I don't want them. If you really care, you are going to take the time to write me an OP, post in the announcement thread, or drop by #amv and say hi. C&C is a very important process, and certain standards should apply. If I have nothing more to say than can be summed up in a star rating, I should probably just remain silent. If I wanted one liners and star ratings, I would be at the tube. It is the quality of those individuals willing to put forth the effort to critique that separates us from "other sites." With preview being fully integrated for local videos, I fear QCs/Star ratings now make it less likely editors will get decent feedback. Not more.

[guy07]

Maybe a expiration date on starts like a week after you watch the video? Maybe ...? No ...?

[Zarxrax]

You only have to leave a star rating if you download from local. Think of it as the payment for using this free service.

[Kionon]

You only have to leave a star rating if you download from local. Think of it as the payment for using this free service.

Fine. I'm a donator. And, I personally don't even use local space. Give donators a no comment button. We're the one's paying for the service!

[Otohiko]

I think the compulsory nature of giving stars is about the only thing that makes the rating useful. Scrap the compulsory-ness and it really becomes a very superficial mechanism - might as well scrap the ratings altogether.

I think the system is flawed but, in the end, it does more good than harm as a weather-vane on actual attitudes of viewers to a video. It doesn't have to be taken too seriously on either the giving or receiving end, but for both sides it's worth the split-second it takes to look over. Saving that brief moment of your attention per video really isn't worth scrapping the whole system for, IMHO.

[Kionon]

I think the compulsory nature of giving stars is about the only thing that makes the rating useful. Scrap the compulsory-ness and it really becomes a very superficial mechanism - might as well scrap the ratings altogether.

Don't tease me. You know the admins will never scrap it.

And I don't find it useful at all.

I think the system is flawed but, in the end, it does more good than harm as a weather-vane on actual attitudes of viewers to a video. It doesn't have to be taken too seriously on either the giving or receiving end, but for both sides it's worth the split-second it takes to look over. Saving that brief moment of your attention per video really isn't worth scrapping the whole system for, IMHO.

Does it? Does it, really? I think not. How can we trust that even the aggregation of star ratings are accurate? I give everyone threes, so I know, at least, I skew every video I watch. I am sure there are plenty of people who give straight ones or straight fives. However, I have yet to talk to anyone who actually sits down and thinks, "Now what star rating should I give this, gotta be fair..." No. Those people write opinions or comment on the announcement thread.

And star ratings tell me nothing about my videos because I don't use local. I'm quite happy that way.

[BasharOfTheAges]

I think the system is flawed but, in the end, it does more good than harm as a weather-vane on actual attitudes of viewers to a video. It doesn't have to be taken too seriously on either the giving or receiving end, but for both sides it's worth the split-second it takes to look over. Saving that brief moment of your attention per video really isn't worth scrapping the whole system for, IMHO.

Does it? Does it, really? I think not. How can we trust that even the aggregation of star ratings are accurate? I give everyone threes, so I know, at least, I skew every video I watch. I am sure there are plenty of people who give straight ones or straight fives. However, I have yet to talk to anyone who actually sits down and thinks, "Now what star rating should I give this, gotta be fair..." No. Those people write opinions or comment on the announcement thread.

I thought there was something in the system to account for that by weighting the scores of those people less and less the more they show no variance.

[Kionon]

So, if that's true, then the situation is even worse. All that work clicking hundeds of star ratings only for it not to count? Perfect example of the need for another option.