101Views14Replies

Author Options:

we should go back to the old rating system Answered

I think we should go back to the +-1 rating system instead of the stars. I was just browsing some instructables because I was bored and they all have roughly 3 stars, that's a big help rating system for which ones I should look at!

Comments

The forums are retiring in 2021 and are now closed for new topics and comments.
0
The Jamalam
The Jamalam

11 years ago

Agreed. I hate this new one and it doesn't allow flexibility and to show the proper rating that the instructable needs. The average idea is ludicrous. Bring this back!

0
GorillazMiko
GorillazMiko

12 years ago

Agreed. Or maybe the update after the +-1 because people cheat during contests. I liked it when it was ONLY able to +1. :-)

0
Spl1nt3rC3ll
Spl1nt3rC3ll

12 years ago

What I don't like is how few people actually rate or vote. My most recent iBle has 1,940 views and only 8 of them rated.

0
Keith-Kid
Keith-Kid

Reply 12 years ago

Yeah!

0
Kiteman
Kiteman

12 years ago

I have a feeling that people are not rating things at all if they don't like them. Rather than go back, I'd say extend it - have a "zero stars" option: 0XXXXX

0
Keith-Kid
Keith-Kid

Reply 12 years ago

I think that's the problem, if people don't rate, the ratings won't change! If just one or two people rate, then the instructable.topic simply stays at average. What we need is for people to start rating instructables, to get the ratings on track. Perhaps going back through instructables we've browsed simply to rate them? We just need to get them moving (the ratings)

0
PKM
PKM

Reply 12 years ago

if people don't rate, the ratings won't change!

I think that's the point- the new system tries to compress (people voting * rating) into one dimension. Number of ratings is misleading because it is very dependent of age of instructable, average rating is misleading because (1 * 5.00) = 5.00 but (100 * 4.5) = 4.5. Essentally, the Instructables that get high ratings on the new system will be the ones that a lot of people rate highly.

Now, looking at the highest rated Instructables I see a number that have been posted in the last couple of weeks, and that would never have happened with the old system (invisible bookshelf would have had the #1 spot for ever).

Yes, the spread is quite compressed because only the top 20 or so have ratings above 4, but this means that a lot more range can be used- a decent 'Tible will get 3.7, a very good one will get 3.9 and only top-notch ones will get above 4, and there's a whole 'nother 1 before the range tops out. (I think "How to construct a utopian society with free ice-cream and LEDs for everyone" would get about 4.8 :P)

Similarly, I know that recently-posted 'Tibles with a rating of 2.7 have been very harshly marked down and can avoid them (which also took a while to happen with the old system, 5 0.5* ratings say more than a -5). It's true, I'm unlikely to give an Instructable a low-ish rating, but this just means that indifferent ones will hover around 2.5-3.5.

Check out the lowest rated 'tibles to see which end up there now.

0
Keith-Kid
Keith-Kid

Reply 12 years ago


(I think "How to construct a utopian society with free ice-cream and LEDs for everyone" would get about 4.8 :P)

ROFL!!!

average rating is misleading because (1 * 5.00) = 5.00 but (100 * 4.5) = 4.5.

That has always bugged me when I see it on other sites...

The ratings have been changed a bit

A 5 star rating just contributes a 3.09, while a 1.2 star rating only gives a 2.98. This is done to avoid an instructable having a rating of 1/2 star because one person rated it as such.

I understand that, but the problem is it also makes it difficult for a worthy instructable to receive what it deserves...

0
PKM
PKM

Reply 12 years ago

I think good ones receive what they deserve, you just have to realise that the spread of ratings means a rating of 4 stars is a very high endorsement. Currently 23 out of 14,000 Instructables (that's 0.16 of one percent) have a score of 4.00 or higher- that gives you a good idea of what a 4+ rating really means. I think computer game magazines etc. are partly to blame for watering down the star rating system by giving too many 10s- if you only have 10 possible ratings, the highest possible should be reserved for absolutely superlative special cases, not just "very good". If you think of 3 as "average" and 5 as "absolutely perfect and un-improvable with ice-cream and LEDs" then you will get a feeling for what a 4 should mean :)

I read about a third of the Instructables posted, and rate the ones I like, but haven't given a 5* since the new system came in. If you adjust your conception of what "four stars" or "five stars" really means, you will see good Instructables are being recognised, and the star system removes a few problems of the old system. I'm not saying it's perfect, but on balance I'd keep it.

0
guyfrom7up
guyfrom7up

Reply 12 years ago

well, which looks more impressive and stands out more: +300 or 3.91 stars

0
Kiteman
Kiteman

Reply 12 years ago

Granted, a high rating looks impressive, but it's also a sign of longevity - an ible that has been here since the early days may be no better than an ible posted this morning, yet it will appear to be better because it has accrued ratings for far longer. In addition, there are the sheep types that rate a project simply because other people have rated it.

On the other hand, any system that shows a running-average of all ratings will, IMO, be a truer guide to the quality of a project, as long as there is an option to give a zero rating for poor projects.

0
Tool Using Animal
Tool Using Animal

12 years ago

We can't go back , Star ratings are part of the web 2.0 paradigm. For those not in the know, web 2.0 is web 1.0 with "Type R" stickers on it.

0
xACIDITYx
xACIDITYx

12 years ago

I agree, I'm not very happy with the new one.

0
ll.13
ll.13

12 years ago

I'm thinking the same. =\ =)