Would this likely be better than the current system for a majority of users to whom this issue matters, not necessarily including yourself?
| Currently 1/5 of an anime or manga is required to be watched or read for users' scores to count in its rating. It seems to me that people mostly fall into two categories on the issue of how much of something people should have to complete for their scores to count. On one side are the completionists, who don't feel that you can honestly score a series unless you have completed it. On the other side is the larger group of noncompletionists (my group, even though I complete close to all of what I watch (but not close to all of what I read)), who feel that it's fair to score series you haven't completed, since if the series irritates you or fails to keep your interest they place the blame on the series, not the watcher or reader. Completionists aren't served well by the current system, where you can be far from completing something but still have your score count, and noncompletionists aren't served well, either, since the requirements for long series are beyond what many can bear when they don't want to continue and feel that it's alright to not continue. When One Piece ends (with hundreds more episodes than it currently has) you'd likely have to watch about 160 episodes of it for your score to count. But who can tolerate that much of something they really don't want to keep watching or reading when they feel it's okay to drop things? This effect favors longer series in the rankings (the rankings do matter to enough people, and not only for "fanboy" reasons, for MAL to see value in adding and maintaining them, regardless of any person's opinion on them). I propose that, instead of compromising between the two groups to have something such as the current singular rating system, two rating systems be simultaneously used. One would only not count scores of things which are either completely unwatched or unread by their scorers or located in the plan to watch or plan to read lists of their scorers. The other would only count scores of things set as completed by their scorers. The latter would be perfect for completionists, while the former would be better than the current system for noncompletionists. I realize that this would consume more CPU time and wouldn't be ideal for every last user, but I think it would overall be more ideal than the current system, so this change should improve MAL, which in theory would make it gain popularity faster, which would offset or more than offset the increase in CPU costs. If it's too much trouble to have both overall and completed top lists, I suggest using the overall ratings for the anime and manga top lists, as I believe more people have than have not rated things they watched or read more than a bit of but have set as watching, on hold, or dropped. Ideally both top lists would be shown for both anime and manga, though. I hope you consider my suggestion from the viewpoint of improving MAL for its users in general, even if this change would be less ideal for yourself. I also hope Xinil can give his thoughts on this issue. EDIT: Here are some other benefits of my suggested system: 1. Everyone could use the completed rating if they were a fan of a main genre of an anime or manga, and could use the overall rating if they were not. Both rating types would serve their respective purposes better than the current rating type serves either purpose. These ratings could even be named to help people understand and thus make use of this. 2. Trolling (cheating to alter ratings up or down) should decrease, because noncompletionists wouldn't be at war be completionists anymore, because each anime and manga would have a rating suited to each group. Less trolling means more representative ratings! Here are some common misconceptions which are not actually problems: 1. It would be harder to find good things within a genre. This is not true, because you could still filter by genre, and then even use either improved rating to make a better decision. All of this means that people are misled into both spending the time to consider and watch or read supposedly good things less often. Many genres already have less general appeal and thus more droppers who rate them worse in general, so you have to compensate for this under the current system, too. The current system doesn't offer anything that emphasizes the votes of genre fans maximally, though... 2. A favorite of mine would have a lower rating or rank on one list! It would have a higher rating on the other list, and what's more important, being a fanboy or finding new good things to watch and read? Please post if anything else confuses you or seems bad. |
Daisuki-chanMay 3, 2010 7:11 PM
 If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
| Current system is fine with me - far from flawless but serviceable. Since I don't really go by other people's ratings/rankings or even be bothered by it, I'm not too interested on changing current system. |
TsukikageRanApr 2, 2010 12:22 AM
| If the current system doesn't mean much to you then you surely wouldn't care much if it was changed, either. I created a fifth poll option for people with your stance. :) EDIT: There has been a vote for "No, but the current system is flawed in some way, and I will explain this in a post because I would like MAL to improve for its users." for multiple hours without an applicable post. The post above mine can't be it because it doesn't explain anything about how MAL could improve its system, which is contrary to the goals of someone who honestly voted that he or she would like MAL to improve. Also, the fifth option (which was created before this vote was cast) better fits that post, as he or she claimed that he or she didn't care much about ratings. Therefore, that vote is false. The reason I wanted a response if someone thought they had a better idea (and agreed that MAL is imperfect) is because my question wasn't of the type "what do you see when red and green light are mixed?" or of the type "what do you wish you saw when red and green light are mixed?", it was of the type "do most people see this color when red and green light are mixed?". I believe my suggestion is closer to the overall correct answer of "yellow" than the current system is, so there should be some reasoning expressed if you feel that I have an idea of "yellow" that is inaccurate in general, and not just to any one voter. The reason I asked "what do most people see?" rather than "what do you see?" was to attempt to limit bias in the responses. I know people often vote for what they want (please vote for "I am quixotic, lazy, and/or selfish." instead if this is the case) rather than what is most likely truly fair, and without first working out a system that addresses any issues of confusion or fear of change that my suggestion would be looked at with and then linking to it in a MAL announcement the results of any poll here would be composed of too few votes to be statistically reliable. I wanted to give people who agree with my suggestion an easy way to express themselves while not shutting out differing thoughts. Multiple people agreeing with me hopefully would strengthen the idea that my suggestion is worth looking into. |
Daisuki-chanApr 4, 2010 8:10 AM
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
| It would be nice if some people posted even when they agreed, just so this thread wouldn't be pushed off of the first page. :) |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
| The currently ratings system is definitely flawed, but not in the way you described. If there was an anime that was truly terrible, then viewers would not bother watching half the series before leaving a review. Also, if this system was to be implemented, people who want their scores weighed in could just pretend they have watched half the series, and people who read their reviews would think that the review has indeed viewed half hte season. I hope I'm making myself clear. -_- The one big flaw I find in the review system is the "top anime". The list needs to take into consideration the amount of users who voted, as well as the score. Presently, a few anime series/movies have jumped to the top, and while their review base isn't very high, the score bumped them up to the top. |
| This has nothing to do with reviews, though. Also, I never suggested that fewer people would attempt to cheat or "troll" the ratings. Increasing the number of bayesian votes would solve your second problem (as well as knock LOGH and Aria down a bit XD), but it has nothing to do with what I was talking about. |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
Daisuki-chan said: Completionists aren't served well by the current system, where you can be far from completing something but still have your score count, and noncompletionists aren't served well, either, since the requirements for long series are beyond what many can bear when they don't want to continue and feel that it's alright to not continue. When One Piece ends (with hundreds more episodes than it currently has) you'd likely have to watch about 160 episodes of it for your score to count. But who can tolerate that much of something they really don't want to keep watching or reading when they feel it's okay to drop things? This effect favors longer series in the rankings 100% agree with this, the actual algorithm is to much simple to be fair: 1/5 for short series really don't have the same impact as for very long ones. It could be so easy to greatly improve the actual scoring system just on changing this "1/5" rule with adding a variable depending on the anime length, like: 1/x, where x has to be calculated with anime length. (or drop this kind of 1/x rule and use a modulo rule instead) |
| I say just do away with the ranking system and let the site fulfill its Main purpose for being somewhere to catalog and list your anime and such.. if anything just have a "most popular" list that fluctuates according to how many people are watching said anime at the time and maybe one that is governed by how many people have completed it. That way you can keep up with whats popular in the anime world with the currently watching and you can scout the completed section to maybe find some stuff that you want to watch that was good. |
kwizatz said: 100% agree with this, the actual algorithm is to much simple to be fair: 1/5 for short series really don't have the same impact as for very long ones. It could be so easy to greatly improve the actual scoring system just on changing this "1/5" rule with adding a variable depending on the anime length, like: 1/x, where x has to be calculated with anime length. (or drop this kind of 1/x rule and use a modulo rule instead) Any x would be arbitrary and not perfectly fair, though. Series with long episodes or which spend proportionally more time on skippable parts like OPs and EDs would be advantaged, while series with short episodes or which spend proportionally less time on skippable parts like OPs and EDs would be disadvantaged. This also assumes that the way x is picked is perfect, which has no chance (or a one in infinity chance, if you consider that to be any different from zero) of happening. My suggestion considers that there are only three non-arbitrary states one can be in regarding an anime: watched none, watched some, or watched all. Any dividing of some into a "worthy of voting" part and a disenfranchised part is arbitrary. It's generally accepted that people who watched none shouldn't get to vote, so only some and all are left, and people in favor of either would be better served under my suggestion, and no one would be arbitrarily disenfranchised. AdmiralSBC said: I say just do away with the ranking system and let the site fulfill its Main purpose for being somewhere to catalog and list your anime and such.. if anything just have a "most popular" list that fluctuates according to how many people are watching said anime at the time and maybe one that is governed by how many people have completed it. That way you can keep up with whats popular in the anime world with the currently watching and you can scout the completed section to maybe find some stuff that you want to watch that was good. MAL's lists increase the popularity of the site and the loyalty of its users, so I don't know why they would be removed. There's already part of your idea here. |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
Daisuki-chan said: Any x would be arbitrary and not perfectly fair, though. Series with long episodes or which spend proportionally more time on skippable parts like OPs and EDs would be advantaged, while series with short episodes or which spend proportionally less time on skippable parts like OPs and EDs would be disadvantaged. When I write "amine length" I mean number of eps, not the length of 1 ep. |
Daisuki-chan said: As far as I know, the current system is like that. Those scores may show up in the stats portion of anime/manga pages but they aren't included in the top anime score.One would only not count scores of things which are either completely unwatched or unread by their scorers or located in the plan to watch or plan to read lists of their scorers. As for the "completed only" score, it's a nice idea but I just don't think it's relevant. The overwhelming majority of scores are from the people who've completed stuff so I doubt it'd be that much different from the current scores. To summarize, I think the current system is fine. |
kwizatz said: When I write "amine length" I mean number of eps, not the length of 1 ep. I know, but time is time. Unless you account for this as well things will still be flawed. kuroshiroi said: As far as I know, the current system is like that. Those scores may show up in the stats portion of anime/manga pages but they aren't included in the top anime score. As for the "completed only" score, it's a nice idea but I just don't think it's relevant. The overwhelming majority of scores are from the people who've completed stuff so I doubt it'd be that much different from the current scores. To summarize, I think the current system is fine. I know they're not included in the ratings, but I wanted to state things completely so there wouldn't be any problems. Actually, it makes a huge difference. Remember when Gintama jumped by 0.63 and into first place? That was all due to disenfranchisement. One Piece will likely jump by 0.8-1 or more, which is just absurd, since if it was 26 episodes (and otherwise exactly as good to the average watcher) instead it would only jump by like 0.03. I just think that main ratings shouldn't arbitrarily and unnecessarily disenfranchise any voters. Having a list for completionists would also be interesting and is a good compromise to ensure that they also benefit from my suggestion. Everyone but the arbitrary would win! ;p |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
Daisuki-chan said: Well, if One Piece jumps to #1 when it ends that just means that the people who watched it, predominantly shounen fans I'd imagine, really liked it all the way through. That doesn't mean that their votes are somehow wrong, it just means that the people who finished it or rather, got really far with it, really liked it. And that's really all it's about, trying to fairly judge something based on having seen enough to be able to judge it.One Piece will likely jump by 0.8-1 or more, which is just absurd, since if it was 26 episodes (and otherwise exactly as good to the average watcher) instead it would only jump by like 0.03. I just think that main ratings shouldn't arbitrarily and unnecessarily disenfranchise any voters. Having a list for completionists would also be interesting and is a good compromise to ensure that they also benefit from my suggestion. Everyone but the arbitrary would win! ;p I'm not entirely sure what you want anymore. Do you want to count the scores from everybody who's watched, i.e. even if it was just 1 episode, or just the people who completely finished it? Your first post seems to indicate option 2 but this latest one seems to indicate option 1. Option 2 would make your problems with the top anime list even worse, if anything. |
kuroshiroi said: Well, if One Piece jumps to #1 when it ends that just means that the people who watched it, predominantly shounen fans I'd imagine, really liked it all the way through. That doesn't mean that their votes are somehow wrong, it just means that the people who finished it or rather, got really far with it, really liked it. And that's really all it's about, trying to fairly judge something based on having seen enough to be able to judge it. Their votes aren't wrong, but neither are the votes of those who couldn't tolerate about 160 episodes of something they didn't like! It should be accepted that many legitimately feel that they should be able to make a judgement when something just isn't worth continuing to them (i.e. is consistently enough (by their standards) not good to them), and for MAL to cater to those people along with the rest. People who want to see ratings from only completers would have their situation improved to perfect (ignoring other issues outside of the scope of what I was talking about) if my suggestion was implemented, too. The main rating list should be for everyone who is making judgements based on experience, and not only on those who happened to like things enough to keep watching them, in my opinion. Droppers would only have an impact on the ratings proportional to the number of people who feel that it's okay to drop things, which is completely fair. Other groups would all receive equally proportional representation, too. Ash-Falls-Town said: Anyway I personally think we should worry about One Piece ending when One Piece is actually close to ending. And allow scores of other anime to maintain and receive arbitrarily boosted ratings in the meantime, just because One Piece's boost level is the arbitrary level to be concerned with? Also, I'm female. Anyway, the voting is 9-6 if you include everyone, but the third option is just wrong, the fifth option is saying that they would not disfavor my suggestion's implementation anyway, and one of the votes for the second option is confirmed to be a lie. That makes it 9-1, except that the probable user who voted for the second option more legitimately was talking about another issue altogether. I hope Xinil will consider my suggestion, as it would make MAL a fairer place that offers more to more people, which I believe should help it gain and retain users. Also, the current system could be maintained while implementing my system, as the systems are not mutually exclusive. |
Daisuki-chanApr 23, 2010 12:55 PM
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
| Chose option #2. I don't necessarily think your idea is bad. I think it could be useful in some ways, but I don't think it's ideal either. I agree with MAL's current idea of having a certain episode requirement for a score to count, but I believe it needs a cap. I'd say it should be the 1/5 thing until, say, 10 episodes. So for a 25 episode series, you'd need to see 5, as it is. For a 40 episode series, you'd need to see 8. For anything higher than 47, no matter if it's 50, 201, or 1,000, you'd need to see 10 episodes. I choose 10 because I feel that at that point any show should be able to show you what it will be offering for the remainder of it's course and people will be able to decide whether or not they want to keep watching, and because I think most people would be able to handle at least that amount before dropping something. |
Daisuki-chan said: I'm not interested in the opinion of those who didn't finish a show or didn't give it a proper chance. If I start something, I intend to finish it. Only watching a few episodes out of a really long show or even 1 out of a short show and then grading it is simply ridiculous; this is also the reason why I don't list shows when I've only seen 1 or 2 episodes and then stopped watching: I didn't give them a proper chance. kuroshiroi said: Their votes aren't wrong, but neither are the votes of those who couldn't tolerate about 160 episodes of something they didn't like! Well, if One Piece jumps to #1 when it ends that just means that the people who watched it, predominantly shounen fans I'd imagine, really liked it all the way through. That doesn't mean that their votes are somehow wrong, it just means that the people who finished it or rather, got really far with it, really liked it. And that's really all it's about, trying to fairly judge something based on having seen enough to be able to judge it. Can the cut-off point be improved? Probably but I'm fine with it as is. |
lollypatrolly said: Well, I don't think another list that only tallies scores from completers is that useful, the difference between the current system and that wouldn't really be all that much, maybe 0.1. The other list would simply be a waste of space.kuroshiroi said: I'm not interested in the opinion of those who didn't finish a show or didn't give it a proper chance. If I start something, I intend to finish it. Only watching a few episodes out of a really long show or even 1 out of a short show and then grading it is simply ridiculous; this is also the reason why I don't list shows when I've only seen 1 or 2 episodes and then stopped watching: I didn't give them a proper chance. Can the cut-off point be improved? Probably but I'm fine with it as is. The fact that you're not interested in their opinion is a matter of your own personal opinion. He's not suggesting that the option of 'sorting by completionist votes only' should be removed, he's merely suggesting the addition of a second, arguably more useful list. But keep on trucking, with enough support this suggestion has at least a chance to be implemented. |
Redfoxoffire said: Chose option #2. I don't necessarily think your idea is bad. I think it could be useful in some ways, but I don't think it's ideal either. I agree with MAL's current idea of having a certain episode requirement for a score to count, but I believe it needs a cap. I'd say it should be the 1/5 thing until, say, 10 episodes. So for a 25 episode series, you'd need to see 5, as it is. For a 40 episode series, you'd need to see 8. For anything higher than 47, no matter if it's 50, 201, or 1,000, you'd need to see 10 episodes. I choose 10 because I feel that at that point any show should be able to show you what it will be offering for the remainder of it's course and people will be able to decide whether or not they want to keep watching, and because I think most people would be able to handle at least that amount before dropping something. I proposed an idea quite similar to yours in Critics and Connoisseurs, a club I have joined. I went through basically everything with many episodes on AniDB and kept track of how many had their episode ratings on average increase soon after their twelfth episodes while the number of voters stayed the same or increased (something which does happen for exceptional episodes). I found none, which implies that episode ratings increasing over time is primarily due to people who don't like the series dropping it and not voting anymore, which is just like what happens on MAL, where being long is an arbitrary advantage. If someone likes a show they will watch more of it anyway, so disenfranchising people for not wanting to continue is unfair from my point of view. kuroshiroi said: I'm not interested in the opinion of those who didn't finish a show or didn't give it a proper chance. If I start something, I intend to finish it. Only watching a few episodes out of a really long show or even 1 out of a short show and then grading it is simply ridiculous; this is also the reason why I don't list shows when I've only seen 1 or 2 episodes and then stopped watching: I didn't give them a proper chance. Can the cut-off point be improved? Probably but I'm fine with it as is. I included option four in my poll for a reason. If MAL wants to be fair it should give honest droppers (who will want the opinions of other droppers factored into the ratings) just as much weight as anyone else. No, there is no non-arbitrary minimum other than simply "not zero" at which it becomes "acceptable" to drop something. Even in the first second of the first episode you could notice that the main character has a characteristic that you find absolutely passionately hateful (which you did not have any reason to know of beforehand) and then drop the series. If you then rate it 1/10 that is your right, as you are honestly expressing your extremely negative opinion of that series, which you know will not change unless the main character dies and is forever heavily dishonored by the whole world, his friends, and his family, something that is ridiculously rare. If you don't like there to be any chance of people changing their ratings you can simply use the completed rating instead if my suggestion was implemented. You win, they win, basically everyone honest wins! lollypatrolly said: The fact that you're not interested in their opinion is a matter of your own personal opinion. He's not suggesting that the option of 'sorting by completionist votes only' should be removed, he's merely suggesting the addition of a second, arguably more useful list. However I'd be fine if this wasn't implemented, but regardless, in that case there needs to be some changes. For one, the cutoff point shouldn't be percentage based after a certain number of episodes. I'll suggest 8-10 episodes for a maximum number needed for votes to count. It's still a somewhat arbitrary number, but it's at least a decent compromise if we want the top lists to be more useful without completely overhauling the system. I voted for the idea, but you'll have to realize that it requires quite a bit of work, and also makes it harder for the average user to navigate or interpret the results. Still, it would provide an excellent tool for getting a better view of what he user-base on the site actually think. I'm female, by the way. It would require Xinil to do some work, but it would be of a similar amount of work to what was required to create the current system, with the exception of creating pages and links to second top lists for completed ratings, IF he chose to do that. After that the only costs would for be the computer power and the small amount of space required to update these ratings and lists twice a day, like the current lists and ratings are updated. I believe that improving MAL would likely be emotionally attractive to Xinil (as MAL is his baby), and that the increased appeal would cause new people to join MAL faster and old users to have a lower chance of leaving, which would likely quite possibly exceed the costs for maintaining the new system, especially if the costs for maintaining the old system were also eliminated. kuroshiroi said: Well, I don't think another list that only tallies scores from completers is that useful, the difference between the current system and that wouldn't really be all that much, maybe 0.1. The other list would simply be a waste of space. But keep on trucking, with enough support this suggestion has at least a chance to be implemented. The mean deviation from what ratings currently are may only be 0.1, yes. However, what would happen is that most anime and manga would deviate by only 0.05 or less. The mean deviation is much higher than this, however, because of outliers like Gintama, which, despite already being quite nicely rated and highly ranked (which generally makes it less likely to gain a lot of rating points or many, many more ranks than a medium rating or rank does), arbitrarily have jumped in rating by large amounts (even by 0.63 or potentially more!) and have jumped scores of ranks (even all the way to number one with no stops along the way!). These outliers make the ratings highly unrepresentative in various, often key cases, which provoke feelings and thus also reactions of ._. and "WTF!!!" in and from many users on MAL, users who deserve equal representation in the ratings due to being just as honest as the next voter (who is represented) is. |
Daisuki-chanApr 24, 2010 8:35 PM
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
| I personally don't feel that there should be any requirement for rating a series. Ratings are completely subjective, and most of the time on MAL they don't really indicate anything. But because of that, I am also unlikely to argue that the 1/5th rule should be changed. |
| If there should be no requirement then my system should be better than the 1/5 system is. |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
| I have no idea how the system works, and the enormous amount of writing on the first page turned me off into reading anything about the system. That said, here are my opinions: 2. Ranked anime that is incompletely viewed should be given a percentage to weight it against those who have seen it all. Example, I've seen one of two OVAs, that means my ranking's weight is cut in half when using it in another formula. Same idea applies to 135/291 or what have you. |
divitoApr 25, 2010 6:05 PM
divito said: http://myanimelist.net/info.php?go=topanime3. It appears that the top anime here aren't weighted with respect to how many people have watched it, which is unfortunate in my mind (I could be wrong here, I haven't crunched the numbers). To be more accurate, relevant and useful, it should take into account the first two points I've made at the very least. I don't get your point #1 but #2 is interesting. |
| Nevermind, I read the formula. It appears that null ranks aren't calculated, so my #1 can be disregarded, as well as my #3. |
Daisuki-chan said: If there should be no requirement then my system should be better than the 1/5 system is. ScrumYummy said: But because of that, I am also unlikely to argue that the 1/5th rule should be changed. read |
| I voted for option #3, however I do not believe the system is flawless... But I do believe that option is correct in relation to 1/5 requirement. Daisuki-chan said: While it did jump .63, I believe that even with a 10 episode cap, or probably even 5, it would still of jumped over .5. Other animes, even those with 26 eps or less, have jumped over .45 (one example being The Book of Bantorra). The fact is, that some animes start out with some of the worst episodes of the series. The mean deviation from what ratings currently are may only be 0.1, yes. However, what would happen is that most anime and manga would deviate by only 0.05 or less. The mean deviation is much higher than this, however, because of outliers like Gintama, which, despite already being quite nicely rated and highly ranked (which generally makes it less likely to gain a lot of rating points or many, many more ranks than a medium rating or rank does), arbitrarily have jumped in rating by large amounts (even by 0.63 or potentially more!) and have jumped scores of ranks (even all the way to number one with no stops along the way!). You argue that people need equal representation -which they do-, however a rating based on 1 or 2 episodes (4-8% of a 26 episode series, or 0.5-1% for 200 episodes), is definitely not a good indication of the series. Equal representation would mean that their vote counts for only the proportion of the series that they have seen, and should only be worth 4% (for 1 ep of a 26 ep series) of the rating of a person who has completed the series. Obviously, this is impractical, thus the 1/5 rating is in place. In your interpretation of equal representation, you assume that a person who dropped the series after 1 episode hates it. Sure, they may hate the first episode (or characters for that matter), but it doesn't mean that they would hate the series if they gave it more of a try. They might, but they also might not. Now, back to your main point, of 2 rating systems. Yes, it will show both ratings, but all it would be doing is giving a boost (in the new list) to animes that start out good, compared to those that start out not so good, but end up being great. The first couple of episodes do not, and should not determine a how good a show is, and contribute highly to what a show is rated. Sequels would also have an even greater boost, because all first seasons are likely to be rated lowly be some people - the current system boosts ALL animes, and in your system, that boost is gone while sequels still get their boost. My only real concern about the current rating system is to do with movies. The requirement of seeing them is the full movie, which is much more than only 1/5 of the series. I do realise I'm sounding hypocritical here as I argued needing to see more episodes do not change it that much, however people often increasing ratings when they finish series (or lower them for that matter). In theory, most people "currently watching" series bring down an animes rating, while movies are not subject to this effect. Theres also plenty of other differences with movies, such as people usually watching it in 1 sitting which tends to leave people remembering the great endings, rather than the boring middles. Either way, it is possible to filter out movies, so its not a major problem anyway. |
| I'm on the side of there being no restrictions on votes counting. All votes should count. Everybody has their own system, me, if I find an anime to be poor, I'm probably not going to give it more than three or four episodes. However, that's not enough to have the vote count in most cases here, but I think it should. You're giving a couple hours to it, that's more than most movies, and it's enough to be able to rate something. If somebody is willing to sit through more than that, odds are they're won over by the series to some degree, so indeed ratings would skew higher than they should. Thats my take on it. |
Psycho_SanjiApr 26, 2010 7:34 AM
ScrumYummy said: Daisuki-chan said: If there should be no requirement then my system should be better than the 1/5 system is. ScrumYummy said: But because of that, I am also unlikely to argue that the 1/5th rule should be changed. read I did read, and you said that one thing should be in agreement with my suggestion, but then won't argue against the very rule opposing that thing. You're free to vote for option four if you wish. You should take a side when discussing my suggestion vs. the current system, rather than saying that the current system defaults to being better simply because it is already implemented, which is arbitrary. divito said: I have no idea how the system works, and the enormous amount of writing on the first page turned me off into reading anything about the system. That said, here are my opinions: 2. Ranked anime that is incompletely viewed should be given a percentage to weight it against those who have seen it all. Example, I've seen one of two OVAs, that means my ranking's weight is cut in half when using it in another formula. Same idea applies to 135/291 or what have you. Weighting is unfair (except when weighting cheaters to oblivion). Being longer should not be an advantage, as that is absolutely arbitrary. Enough people agree with you to often not vote when they dropped the anime or manga. However, people who do drop and vote surely respect the opinions of other drop-voters to a normal extent, and do not deserve to be disenfranchised along with an entire group that they value the opinions of! llamaben, Gintama is your #1 favorite anime, so you can't speak for everyone (as if anyone can!) on Gintama becoming better or not. I read enough of Gintama to know a 10 or 5 episode requirement's worth of material and I found it bad and thus dropped it (never mind that the filler episodes are often considered bad and would have quite possibly caused me to find the anime even worse!). The problems I had with Gintama were specifically mentioned by me to multiple hardcore fanboys, and yet none of them (despite being passionate about how "right" they were) could logically explain why I would find the anime good while I found the manga bad. There is no way that every last low voter would increase (or even not decrease) their ratings if they only watched more of Gintama. Gintama is not an anime crafted by an all-loving ridiculously intelligent and creative being. If you want Gintama to both have and truly deserve a top rank then you should actually support my suggestion, as it would be rated even higher on the completed list. The fact is that Gintama's current rank and rating is very unrepresentative of MAL overall, and supporting the disenfranchisement of a group of people who strongly disagree with your opinion that Gintama is fabulous is simply selfish and unfair. Your idea on what equal representation would mean is silly, as people obviously flee from things that they find bad. This is not their fault, but is in fact a human compulsion, and, if it must be blamed on anything, it must be blamed on the source of that badness to those people, not on those people. Down with elitism! (Although the completed list would have plenty of elitism for anyone who wanted it, so criers of "Up with elitism!" should also support my suggestion, if they're interested in what they consider to be closer to "the truth".) Again, if you want ratings to be "immutable" then just support my suggestion and look at the completed ratings and rankings. They would be as perfect as MAL could make them, ignoring factors unrelated to my suggestion, such as bayesian size and vote level and cheaters/trolls, which are separate problems (depending on your point of view) that there is no reason to believe would increase under my suggestion. Even if they would increase somewhat (although there is zero evidence of this) it doesn't justify disenfranchising a whole group of voters for doing something completely unrelated and honest. Anime that start out good cause people to keep watching them, silly. If they stay good then they deserve those earlier ratings. If they later get worse and cause some people to drop them then those votes will go down or be removed. There is no real problem. Thank you for presenting a point of view that represents the interests of all honest voters (and not only oneself, who can be represented equally and fairly by simply scoring according to one's own interests), Psycho_Kenshin. The current count is 11 for to 6 against, except that all of the six I've noticed were either liars (at least one of them) or should've voted for option four instead. I haven't seen any arguments that prove that it's fair (and not just personally preferable) to disenfranchise any honest voters. |
Daisuki-chanApr 26, 2010 5:00 PM
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
Daisuki-chan said: Your basically bringing in the whole argument from the other thread awhile ago, which I specifically tried to avoid as it was getting nowhere... Yes, it is my #1 anime, but in this thread, I did not mention it becoming better. Go on the Gintama stats page, to around votes 13000+ (should start at 4-5s). There are some people who have seen 10-20, or even 40 odd and dropped it, but the majority have seen 0-5 episodes... Then theres potential trolls, but thats another matter. llamaben, Gintama is your #1 favorite anime, so you can't speak for everyone (as if anyone can!) on Gintama becoming better or not. I read enough of Gintama to know a 10 or 5 episode requirement's worth of material and I found it bad and thus dropped it (never mind that the filler episodes are often considered bad and would have quite possibly caused me to find the anime even worse!). The problems I had with Gintama were specifically mentioned by me to multiple hardcore fanboys, and yet none of them (despite being passionate about how "right" they were) could logically explain why I would find the anime good while I found the manga bad. There is no way that every last low voter would increase (or even not decrease) their ratings if they only watched more of Gintama. Gintama is not an anime crafted by an all-loving ridiculously intelligent and creative being. If you want Gintama to both have and truly deserve a top rank then you should actually support my suggestion, as it would be rated even higher on the completed list. The fact is that Gintama's current rank and rating is very unrepresentative of MAL overall, and supporting the disenfranchisement of a group of people who strongly disagree with your opinion that Gintama is fabulous is simply selfish and unfair. Your idea on what equal representation would mean is silly, as people obviously flee from things that they find bad. This is not their fault, but is in fact a human compulsion, and, if it must be blamed on anything, it must be blamed on the source of that badness to those people, not on those people. Down with elitism! (Although the completed list would have plenty of elitism for anyone who wanted it, so criers of "Up with elitism!" should also support my suggestion, if they're interested in what they consider to be closer to "the truth".) Again, if you want ratings to be "immutable" then just support my suggestion and look at the completed ratings and rankings. They would be as perfect as MAL could make them, ignoring factors unrelated to my suggestion, such as bayesian size and vote level and cheaters/trolls, which are separate problems (depending on your point of view) that there is no reason to believe would increase under my suggestion. Even if they would increase somewhat (although there is zero evidence of this) it doesn't justify disenfranchising a whole group of voters for doing something completely unrelated and honest. Sure, I could just look at that one column, but the other column will always be there to annoy me, and plenty of others. Anime that start out good cause people to keep watching them, silly. If they stay good then they deserve those earlier ratings. If they later get worse and cause some people to drop them then those votes will go down or be removed. There is no real problem. Start out good than end good - fine. The matter is not their rating, but their rating in relation to those that start bad, and are underrated by the new system in that column (even if they are higher in the competed column, it will still cause a large deviation, potentially 0.5+ .)Thank you for presenting a point of view that represents the interests of all honest voters (and not only oneself, who can be represented equally and fairly by simply scoring according to one's own interests), Psycho_Kenshin. It seems you just praise people who agree, then criticise those who don't. Your the one denying all other opinions, according to your own interest. [In no way is this targeted against Kenshin's opinion].The current count is 11 for to 6 against, except that all of the six I've noticed were either liars (at least one of them) or should've voted for option four instead. I haven't seen any arguments that prove that it's fair (and not just personally preferable) to disenfranchise any honest voters. Likewise, I haven't seen any arguments that prove its fair to let their vote count when they haven't seen a good proportion of the anime. |
| Let's step away from concepts here and think about practicality. 1. MAL already has a shit ton of problems. 2. You've already mentioned CPU consumption. The current ranking system is only updated a few times a day because it causes heavy server load to sort over 25,000 combined anime and manga entries. Now let's think about it doing that twice over. Or having two lists that aren't updated as often. 3. The anime database has 279 pages worth of entries. Sort by episodes and series this might actually be practical for cover barely more than 10 pages. Approximately 40% of them aren't even weighted because they're series no one has even heard of in the west. A potentially slower MAL for the implementation of another pointless list that won't be drastically different for 98% of the database? I don't know what kind of hard-on some people get from seeing their favorite anime in the top 10 but in the end, it's just a number. This is unnecessary; the current system does its job well enough. |
| What Xjellocross said x12 Really. Truly. |
| None the less, lowering the minimum percentage of a series seen to have your vote count won't do much harm to the site's load. And it makes sense. If a series is amazingly bad, most aren't going to watch more than three episodes of it. And the people deserve to know how bad this show is, by having the votes of these wise thinkers who dropped it count. And besides, it just encourages people to fill in a higher number of episodes than they actually watched to make their vote count. If somebody finds a show really bad, why would they watch more than a few episodes of it? They shouldn't, and their votes should count. Dropping a show shouldn't be discouraged. Watching 10 episodes of a show you hate is akin to watching several sequels to a movie you hated. |
Psycho_SanjiApr 27, 2010 1:21 PM
| Have an anecdote. When I set the number of episodes for the new FMA a few weeks back, I checked to see if the score would change. It didn't change, at all. Not 0.01. You might say that it "only" has 63 episodes but then what is the number of episodes you think it would need to have before it would be affected? 100? 150? I think this huge jump that's attributed to Gintama is simply due to the fact that the first few episodes aren't that good. I haven't looked into this personally but I believe what llamaben says about a lot of people having started it and then stopped fairly soon and then proceeded to give it a low score. Watching 10 episodes out of a 200 episode series and calling it bad is completely unfair. It's not representative of the series. And besides, like Xjellocross said, this idea would be placed at the bottom of a very long list of things that need to be done around MAL. I'm not trying to dissuade you, just stating facts. |
| Well, your opinion that viewing 10 episodes out of 200 isn't fair to count is certainly not a fact, but hey. Personally, I think imdb is kind of the standard, I like the way they do things. They let you rate TV shows (including anime) without how many episodes you've seen having any part in it. That's simply more fair, because again, if a show goes 200 episodes 99% of the people who watch all of those episodes are fans of the show. People who aren't fans shouldn't have to watch a huge amount for their opinion to be counted. The flaws in the current system just are pretty obvious in my opinion. It's not a terrible system, but it could very easily be massively improved. |
kuroshiroi said: Have an anecdote. When I set the number of episodes for the new FMA a few weeks back, I checked to see if the score would change. It didn't change, at all. Not 0.01. You might say that it "only" has 63 episodes but then what is the number of episodes you think it would need to have before it would be affected? 100? 150? I think the case is that, even if the episode number is set, any score counts until a show finishes airing. I thought of this when Kimi ni Todoke finished and jumped a slight bit despite having had 24-25 episodes listed for a while. If this is the case, we'll see Brotherhood's jump when it finishes. I think this huge jump that's attributed to Gintama is simply due to the fact that the first few episodes aren't that good. I haven't looked into this personally but I believe what llamaben says about a lot of people having started it and then stopped fairly soon and then proceeded to give it a low score. Watching 10 episodes out of a 200 episode series and calling it bad is completely unfair. It's not representative of the series. Well, I watched 25 episodes and didn't find 11-25 to be any different really. Is that still not enough in your mind? In fact, episode 6 was my favorite, so if I'd only dropped it at 10, I might have actually given it a higher score. In any case, why should any show, no matter the length, take more than 10 episodes to start getting good? That's almost a full season right there, the entire length of some other amazing shows, and this is just the build up (extremely boring build up, I might add)? I don't buy it. By that time, any show should be getting somewhere. |
Daisuki-chan said: Weighting is unfair (except when weighting cheaters to oblivion). Being longer should not be an advantage, as that is absolutely arbitrary. Enough people agree with you to often not vote when they dropped the anime or manga. However, people who do drop and vote surely respect the opinions of other drop-voters to a normal extent, and do not deserve to be disenfranchised along with an entire group that they value the opinions of! I guess there is a first for everything, and hearing that weighting is unfair is surely a first. The entire aspect of weighting is to ensure fairness and bring proportion to the numbers involved. And to be analgous, omitting their votes based on number of episodes would be disenfranchising. However, we realistically develop a proportion based on their experience with it. We include them at a more reasonable level. For instance, if I walked out of a movie five minutes in, and rated that movie as a three, how reliable is such a vote? Why should my vote count equally among all the people who actually viewed the entire thing, and had a more complete basis by which to generate a rating? Logically, let's think down this line a bit more; if you happened to drop a series halfway through, what you're rating on your list is not the entire series, but half of the series. Precisely why such a vote would count half as much as proposed by myself. ---------------------------------- In general, there are basically two solutions to this problem. Either the formula gets more complicated to enhance accuracy, through weighting and other little calculations; or the number of episodes entered simply gets tossed aside, which eliminates any type of debate, but which will lead to a less accurate system. |
llamaben said: Your basically bringing in the whole argument from the other thread awhile ago, which I specifically tried to avoid as it was getting nowhere... Yes, it is my #1 anime, but in this thread, I did not mention it becoming better. Go on the Gintama stats page, to around votes 13000+ (should start at 4-5s). There are some people who have seen 10-20, or even 40 odd and dropped it, but the majority have seen 0-5 episodes... Then theres potential trolls, but thats another matter. Wow, so Gintama sucked so hard at the beginning that most people couldn't make it past 5 episodes of it? And I'm supposed to blame these honest people and support their disenfranchement (which makes the rating ridiculously unrepresentive of MAL as a whole and especially them) why? If you need to blame something blame Gintama for messing up. Blaming people for rationally fleeing things they (not you; you don't decide for them) honestly dislike is ridiculous. Yes, it is silly, hence why its 1/5 instead, as I said before. If people didn't like the first episode(s), that should go in the poll for the episode discussion, not the anime. Sure, they can take that into account after they see more, but I just can't see it as being fair if a voter who has seen that little of the anime can vote. The 1/5 is what is silly. It's arbitrary! The episode discussion polls? I'm sure most people deciding whether or not to watch or keep watching something deeply analyze those instead of looking at the supposedly accurate overall rating. >_> The fairness is in letting every type of person represent themselves equally to all others. Just because one person dislikes something and is willing to drop it because of that doesn't make them any less honest or inferior to the fanboy who just can't get enough of that thing. Equality is a nice thing, really! Sure, I could just look at that one column, but the other column will always be there to annoy me, and plenty of others. So because you would be annoyed loads of honest people should be classified as inferior and not get to have their votes count? What an annoying idea. Start out good than end good - fine. The matter is not their rating, but their rating in relation to those that start bad, and are underrated by the new system in that column (even if they are higher in the competed column, it will still cause a large deviation, potentially 0.5+ .) Things are overrated under the current system. You don't get to decide what started bad and improved later for everyone. People can and often do have fundamental issues with various anime and manga, and dropping them because of those issues is rational, too, not inferior and thus unworthy of having their votes count. It seems you just praise people who agree, then criticise those who don't. Your the one denying all other opinions, according to your own interest. [In no way is this targeted against Kenshin's opinion]. Likewise, I haven't seen any arguments that prove its fair to let their vote count when they haven't seen a good proportion of the anime. I am sorry that I value fairness and thus value the support of those who support fairness. I'm a bad person that way. Why isn't it fair? With cheaters you know they don't deserve to have their votes count, as they are voting multiple times and/or haven't seen any of what they're voting on. With droppers what is the issue? Ratings are just averages of opinions. You can't say an opinion is wrong just because the person did what was rational and didn't continue to gather more information. If someone starts beating you do you just wait for the beating to end to evaluate it fully and then react? Or do you think "Screw this!" and fight back or flee? I know you'll probably think and/or say that that's an "entirely" different situation, but something negative doesn't become neutral just because there's less of it. Moreover, you can't know how negatively other feel about forcing themselves to watch many episodes of something that they hate. I'm sure some of them would actually rather just be punched in the face, and wouldn't be joking or lying when expressing that. Xjellocross said: Let's step away from concepts here and think about practicality. 1. MAL already has a shit ton of problems. 2. You've already mentioned CPU consumption. The current ranking system is only updated a few times a day because it causes heavy server load to sort over 25,000 combined anime and manga entries. Now let's think about it doing that twice over. Or having two lists that aren't updated as often. 3. The anime database has 279 pages worth of entries. Sort by episodes and series this might actually be practical for cover barely more than 10 pages. Approximately 40% of them aren't even weighted because they're series no one has even heard of in the west. A potentially slower MAL for the implementation of another pointless list that won't be drastically different for 98% of the database? I don't know what kind of hard-on some people get from seeing their favorite anime in the top 10 but in the end, it's just a number. This is unnecessary; the current system does its job well enough. So update the two FAIR lists each once a day instead of updating one UNFAIR list twice a day. I'm sure MAL would collapse from that change. Your 3 doesn't seem to apply to my suggestion. MAL already takes the time to find bayesian estimates for anything with enough votes to receive one and doesn't do so for anything without enough votes. My suggestion doesn't propose to alter this. Instead you should be wondering if dropping the requirement that MAL both calculate what 1/5 of the anime length is and then check, for every voter, whether they met that requirement or not would save CPU time. Obviously it would, and for the (less important to me personally) completed rating calculations at least MAL would just grab the list types (without modification) instead of having to grab the episode counts and then divide them and then round the results (modification). This means that one round of rating calculations and rankings for one list would be less expensive than it currently is. Because of this updating two fair lists once a day would be less expensive than updating one unfair list once a day. So it would be less expensive and cheaper, but would only update half as often, but still quite often, in my opinion. It sounds like a good trade to me, if costs are a serious issue! Psycho_Kenshin said: None the less, lowering the minimum percentage of a series seen to have your vote count won't do much harm to the site's load. And it makes sense. If a series is amazingly bad, most aren't going to watch more than three episodes of it. And the people deserve to know how bad this show is, by having the votes of these wise thinkers who dropped it count. And besides, it just encourages people to fill in a higher number of episodes than they actually watched to make their vote count. If somebody finds a show really bad, why would they watch more than a few episodes of it? They shouldn't, and their votes should count. Dropping a show shouldn't be discouraged. Watching 10 episodes of a show you hate is akin to watching several sequels to a movie you hated. Lowering the percentage to a simple "above zero" requirement would be easier on the site than having to separately calculate every single requirement (divide and then round) and then compare them all anyway. "And the people deserve to know how bad this show is, by having the votes of these wise thinkers who dropped it count." Yes. These people have equal worth as MAL users, don't they? Why shouldn't they be able to find out about the opinions of all honest people when it would help them make a decision (what I believe ratings and rankings ought to be for, and this is useful, unlike fanboys looking down on each other for liking something "worse" than them)? If you support other systems your vote would also count under my suggestion, only equally to everyone else's. Can't you just be egalitarian on this issue? Vote for option four if you want, but why try to claim that it's actually superior for MAL or MAL users as a whole? kuroshiroi said: Have an anecdote. When I set the number of episodes for the new FMA a few weeks back, I checked to see if the score would change. It didn't change, at all. Not 0.01. You might say that it "only" has 63 episodes but then what is the number of episodes you think it would need to have before it would be affected? 100? 150? I think this huge jump that's attributed to Gintama is simply due to the fact that the first few episodes aren't that good. I haven't looked into this personally but I believe what llamaben says about a lot of people having started it and then stopped fairly soon and then proceeded to give it a low score. Watching 10 episodes out of a 200 episode series and calling it bad is completely unfair. It's not representative of the series. And besides, like Xjellocross said, this idea would be placed at the bottom of a very long list of things that need to be done around MAL. I'm not trying to dissuade you, just stating facts. As Redfoxoffire said, you were missing a piece of information. FMA (2009) will get its boost in nine weeks. Goodness is subjective. In reality forcing oneself to watch something one dislikes is likely to make one want to rate it even lower, not higher. Granted, others will start liking it, but this doesn't make them superior or more worthy of having their votes counted. Please just let honest opinions be heard. It's representative of the people who watch the series, though. Series don't have feelings or need to use their time, money, or effort to simply be played. People matter more. Additionally, if you really want people with opinions on all episodes combined then why not support my suggestion? Then you'll have a nice and perfect completed rating for every anime and manga. You would win (unless winning is contingent on enforcing your "superiority" over some to you), too! Psycho_Kenshin said: Well, your opinion that viewing 10 episodes out of 200 isn't fair to count is certainly not a fact, but hey. Personally, I think imdb is kind of the standard, I like the way they do things. They let you rate TV shows (including anime) without how many episodes you've seen having any part in it. That's simply more fair, because again, if a show goes 200 episodes 99% of the people who watch all of those episodes are fans of the show. People who aren't fans shouldn't have to watch a huge amount for their opinion to be counted. The flaws in the current system just are pretty obvious in my opinion. It's not a terrible system, but it could very easily be massively improved. IMDB has issues, too, though. The Simpsons, a long-running and very popular and loved series that has been a part of popular culture for a long time, has fewer votes than this cartoon does. It's obviously impossible that under half as many people wanted to vote on something popular and loved as wanted to vote on some fairly unknown, apparently mediocre cartoon. IMDB simply didn't count most of the votes for The Simpsons, because they didn't qualify as "regular voters". Because regular voters are not a random sample it's hard to believe that either rating is likely highly accurate. On top of that, their regular voters cheat just as much as the overall group does, if not more. The Godfather has nearly 24,000 one votes, or 6.1% of the total! Anyway, it is true that not requiring any level of completion for series is one way that IMDB is doing a good job. Redfoxoffire said: kuroshiroi said: Have an anecdote. When I set the number of episodes for the new FMA a few weeks back, I checked to see if the score would change. It didn't change, at all. Not 0.01. You might say that it "only" has 63 episodes but then what is the number of episodes you think it would need to have before it would be affected? 100? 150? I think the case is that, even if the episode number is set, any score counts until a show finishes airing. I thought of this when Kimi ni Todoke finished and jumped a slight bit despite having had 24-25 episodes listed for a while. If this is the case, we'll see Brotherhood's jump when it finishes. I think this huge jump that's attributed to Gintama is simply due to the fact that the first few episodes aren't that good. I haven't looked into this personally but I believe what llamaben says about a lot of people having started it and then stopped fairly soon and then proceeded to give it a low score. Watching 10 episodes out of a 200 episode series and calling it bad is completely unfair. It's not representative of the series. Well, I watched 25 episodes and didn't find 11-25 to be any different really. Is that still not enough in your mind? In fact, episode 6 was my favorite, so if I'd only dropped it at 10, I might have actually given it a higher score. In any case, why should any show, no matter the length, take more than 10 episodes to start getting good? That's almost a full season right there, the entire length of some other amazing shows, and this is just the build up (extremely boring build up, I might add)? I don't buy it. By that time, any show should be getting somewhere. Indeed. FMA (2009) will jump when it's rating calculation algorithm starts disenfranchising enough honest voters, although that may be overshadowed by the effect of the ending, which may help or hurt it. I also agree that it's silly to blame the users for the anime or manga failing to be attractive enough to continue watching or reading it. If one must blame something, blame the art, not the honest voter simply giving his opinion. There is no correct overall opinion that MAL should be trying to force its ratings to represent. MAL being fair and letting everyone honest have their opinions count equally would be nice, though! divito said: I guess there is a first for everything, and hearing that weighting is unfair is surely a first. The entire aspect of weighting is to ensure fairness and bring proportion to the numbers involved. And to be analgous, omitting their votes based on number of episodes would be disenfranchising. However, we realistically develop a proportion based on their experience with it. We include them at a more reasonable level. For instance, if I walked out of a movie five minutes in, and rated that movie as a three, how reliable is such a vote? Why should my vote count equally among all the people who actually viewed the entire thing, and had a more complete basis by which to generate a rating? Logically, let's think down this line a bit more; if you happened to drop a series halfway through, what you're rating on your list is not the entire series, but half of the series. Precisely why such a vote would count half as much as proposed by myself. ---------------------------------- In general, there are basically two solutions to this problem. Either the formula gets more complicated to enhance accuracy, through weighting and other little calculations; or the number of episodes entered simply gets tossed aside, which eliminates any type of debate, but which will lead to a less accurate system. In practice weighting other than to undo the effects of dishonest votes is elitist, even if it's supposedly done to increase fairness. Ten people's honest votes counting at 30% each is a loss of 10x0.7=7 honest votes' worth of opinions. That's just as bad as counting seven people's honest votes at 0%. Can't they just be free to express their honest opinions? You can't claim that everyone's opinions would change in a way similar to the boosts the current system provides, as you can't represent all of those people and their various preferences. Letting them represent themselves on equal footing with anyone else who is being honest would increase fairness. If you walked out of a movie five minutes in and then honestly rated it 1 you would be just as worthy to have your opinion be heard as the next person. Believe it or not, basically everyone has various levels of irritation buttons that can be pressed for various reasons. Opinions are already subjective, so how is it fair to say that one honest opinion is "justifiable" but another is not? The formula would get less complicated, as the same comparison to zero episodes seen (a voter's episode count must be greater than zero) or an unmodified total episode counts seen (or just being in a completed list or not) would be applied to each series, rather than grabbing thousands of anime and manga episode counts and then dividing them, and then rounding them, and then comparing them (comparing them alone is just as costly as the entirety of my system's alteration) to how much each voter has seen or read. What do you mean by accuracy? Why doesn't including every last honest opinion more accurately show what MAL users as a whole feel? Ratings are opinions, which are subjective. Can you even find a group of 1000 "objective" people who all have the exact same opinion on everything? If "deserved" ratings and people can both be objective then such a thing must be possible. If that's impossible then why don't you just let MAL represent everyone's subjective opinions equally and fairly? Wouldn't representing everyone fairly increase its value to many people, along with simply being a "good thing to do"? MAL becoming a better site (by "advertising" more representative overall ratings) should increase its popularity faster as well as decrease the proportional number of people who leave over time. So implementing my system does have a cost, but overall serves both noncompletionists and especially completionists (i.e. the many) better without being arbitrary, and thereafter either costs somewhat more to sacrifice nothing or slightly less to lose very little (while still gaining all that desirable fairness and user love). Viva la MAL! |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
Redfoxoffire said: I'm pretty sure this is the case as well, I've noticed it with at least another 5 series. I think the case is that, even if the episode number is set, any score counts until a show finishes airing. Offtopic Gintama dicussion @Redfoxoffire |
Daisuki-chan said: My third point exists because you seem to be pressing this issue based on the fact that you would like your votes to count for series such as One Piece or Gintama without having to waste your time watching over 20 episodes. I can understand the problem with this. However, these types of series account for a very small portion of the database. I'd rather Xinil be working on a whole bunch of other things such as the scanlator database than waste his time on something so remarkably trivial. One season shows take up to three episodes to count and two seasons take up to five or six. I don't see how either of those milestones are difficult to reach if you're so desperate to have your opinion counted by the system.Long stuff It's a rank. A number. Does it really hurt that much to see something you don't like in a high position? Because that's the only reason I can see for you to be stressing how UNFAIR the current system is. |
llamaben said: Seems I was wrong. Not the end of the world.Redfoxoffire said: I'm pretty sure this is the case as well, I've noticed it with at least another 5 series. I think the case is that, even if the episode number is set, any score counts until a show finishes airing. Anyway, some people only rate stuff when they've finished watching it, such as myself. I know Clannad AS experienced a massive boost in the days following its finish. Although I guess that's really not long enough to be affected massively by this "disenfranchisement". I can only end by paraphrasing what Xjellocross said: It's just a ranking, get over it. |
Daisuki-chan said: It did not mess up. Although those episodes weren't as good as the rest of the series, they were good for character introductions. Without them, the rest would not be as good. In no way am I blaming people for fleeing it, all I'm saying is that their vote should not count. If you need to blame something blame Gintama for messing up. Blaming people for rationally fleeing things they (not you; you don't decide for them) honestly dislike is ridiculous. The 1/5 is what is silly. It's arbitrary! The episode discussion polls? I'm sure most people deciding whether or not to watch or keep watching something deeply analyze those instead of looking at the supposedly accurate overall rating. >_> I constantly look at episode dicussion polls if I don't really like the first episodes, and compare them to those later in the anime. Sure, thats only me, but I'm sure others do as well - even if you don't. So because you would be annoyed loads of honest people should be classified as inferior and not get to have their votes count? What an annoying idea. I can't really see a link between people not having their votes count and being "inferior". Their votes only don't count because they haven't seen enough of the anime to rate them accurately, not because their view isn't as good (sure, its fine for that episode, but not the series as a whole.) You don't get to decide what started bad and improved later for everyone. Of course I don't decide what starts bad and improves later. But I definitely have a better opinion of it then those who haven't even seen more then 1 episode. I am sorry that I value fairness and thus value the support of those who support fairness. I'm a bad person that way. Fairness is completely subjective. You see the 1/5 rule as unfair, I see it as fair. I'm sure theres plenty of others in both categories as well. You cannot argue that you are promoting fairness. Why isn't it fair? With cheaters you know they don't deserve to have their votes count, as they are voting multiple times and/or haven't seen any of what they're voting on. With droppers what is the issue? Ratings are just averages of opinions. Theres not much different between seeing nothing, and seeing say 1% of something. Moreover, you can't know how negatively other feel about forcing themselves to watch many episodes of something that they hate. Nobody is forcing them to watch it. If they hate it - drop it. I'm pretty sure they won't watch a certain number of episodes just so their individual vote counts, nor will they care about their individual vote, and whether or not it counts. Sure, they may care about the overall rating, but definitely not their vote. |
kuroshiroi said: In any case, why should any show, no matter the length, take more than 10 episodes to start getting good? That's almost a full season right there, the entire length of some other amazing shows, and this is just the build up (extremely boring build up, I might add)? I don't buy it. By that time, any show should be getting somewhere. THIS I think everyone should count. No wonder MAL doesn't have almost anything lower than 7, except for some hentai. Hell, I knew I wouldn't like Haruhi from the first second of it. I just sensed it. Neverthless, I watched 3 or 4 episodes more /I am confused how many they are, really/ and nothing changed. It was natural for me to drop it. "watch till 5-6 episode, then it gets good". I don't **** care! I couldn't stand all those first episodes, aside from the beautiful art and Sugita Tomokazu D: I just couldn't make it to episode 6, sue me! I don't know if my low score counts, and I don't care, but it should count in the future. Haruhi remained all the way through the same character and she was annoying me all the time. I can't finish something like this. But I gave it a high score, 4 or smt, because of the art. Enough bashing Haruhi, now I'll say one of my most favourite animes - K-ON! Sure, I love this show; but it's not the same for all people. There are certain people who enjoy this. It stays the same all the way through, so if you didn't like ep 1-2 you won't like it in the future either. Well those are only 13 episodes series, of course. I think the suggestion "rating, considering how many episodes the anime is" is good. And also, it should consider the number of people voted on this. How come 2000 people decide what's the best anime out there atm, when number 4-5-6 have, like 20,000 votes? This is just wrong for me. I don't care if you change it or not anymore, I give up. Do what you want but at least think about it. It really isn't fare. Besides, all the drops will count, all the low scores from the start will count, and every anime will have its haters so nothing will change that much. Of course, aside from the more "real" score, that is. |
 |
Nao-stani said: And I will reiterate, why does it matter? These are numbers used to give users a quick idea of how good an anime is at a glance. Popularity does not denote quality. It's not some stupid voting contest. Does it really matter whether 4, 5, and 6 are below 1, 2, and 3? The way I see it, everything in the top 100 can be switched around randomly and it wouldn't make a difference.Well those are only 13 episodes series, of course. I think the suggestion "rating, considering how many episodes the anime is" is good. And also, it should consider the number of people voted on this. How come 2000 people decide what's the best anime out there atm, when number 4-5-6 have, like 20,000 votes? This is just wrong for me. |
Daisuki-chan said: In practice weighting other than to undo the effects of dishonest votes is elitist, even if it's supposedly done to increase fairness. It's elitist to make a rank proportional to the subject matter you're ranking? I suppose by that logic, it'd be fine to rate a car based on its body alone, nevermind anything else about the car. (And thus, it is more correctly stated that you dislike the body, not the car as a whole. Unfortunately, that can't be expressed on this website unless more complex calculations are taken into account, to say that 90% of people that dropped a series early didn't like it.) Daisuki-chan said: Can't they just be free to express their honest opinions? Yes; in the comments. Daisuki-chan said: You can't claim that everyone's opinions would change in a way similar to the boosts the current system provides, as you can't represent all of those people and their various preferences. Letting them represent themselves on equal footing with anyone else who is being honest would increase fairness. It would be equal if they viewed an equal amount of episodes. Since that's not possible, proportion. Daisuki-chan said: If you walked out of a movie five minutes in and then honestly rated it 1 you would be just as worthy to have your opinion be heard as the next person. I can't help but think this is a troll based on this logic. Daisuki-chan said: Opinions are already subjective, so how is it fair to say that one honest opinion is "justifiable" but another is not? People are going to rank however they see fit, regardless of any of the subjectivity involved. The aspect I'm going towards is the common sense notion of ranking a series as a whole. What good is a ranking of an anime that someone might have made based simply on the title of it? That should be equally valid? How, as a fan looking for more anime to watch, does that help me in any way whatsoever? Why should I get inaccurate advice because irrational and illogical rankings are viewed equally, instead of taking in legitimate votes based on people who have seen it? Daisuki-chan said: Why doesn't including every last honest opinion more accurately show what MAL users as a whole feel? An honest opinion isn't necessarily logical. A biased ranking, or a ranking from someone that only watched a few episodes tells me nothing of the entire series in which I want to watch. If anything, it misleads people that don't want to do the research beforehand. Given the nature of this website, and of people in general, I always look deeper than rankings before deciding to watch a show, but not everyone will. If a new anime happened to come out, and 95% of the people dropped it after 5 episodes, and ranked it poorly; but on the other end, the 5% kept watching and turned out to like it a lot, with just statistics alone, how are you to discern that without proportion? With the logic of counting every vote equal, it turns into majority rules, which unfortunately is a fallacy. There's no way I could endorse a system that invokes a fallacy. |
lollypatrolly said: ^The current ranking system is based just as much on the same fallacy of majority rules, this suggestion is not going to change anything about that. Is there any way you can endorse the current system? One way or the other, I don't really care which system is in place; even if the current system has its flaws. I've run a few sites, and created a few ranking systems (not for anime), but some of it can be very tedious to alter. I'd completely understand if they just want to leave it as is. In my mind though, I put forth my idea when I saw this thread in an attempt to possibly get the system changed to be more accurate. Whether the people in charge wish to explore options is up to them, and hopefully the users of MAL get some kind of notification whether they plan to investigate or not. |
| Well, it's just taking me so long to reply to every last sentence now, so I'll cut down on that. "Either way, thats still no justification. To me, in no way are 3-10, or 3-25 terrible, but the its pretty much character introduction, and are also better if you know the characters already. Anyway, if you don't like it after that many eps, your probably wouldn't love it later either (though your rating would definitely improve significantly)." is trying to pass off subjectivity as objectivity and make a "true" judgement on what is justified. "However, these types of series account for a very small portion of the database." was already responded to by me, but I guess it's fine to ignore me if you're "sure" you're right. "I'd rather Xinil be working on a whole bunch of other things such as the scanlator database than waste his time on something so remarkably trivial." is telling me that you should judge what should happen for MAL based on what you subjectively favor and what you subjectively find "remarkably" trivial, despite me explaining how useful ratings can be. Xinil can come here and (even briefly) say one of three types of things: "Your suggestion is good and I will try to implement it soon.", "Your suggestion is good and I will try to implement it after some other things of my choice.", or "I won't be persuaded to implement your suggestion at any time.". I'm not going to accept a non-Xinil speaking for Xinil. "difficult to reach" is subjective and ignores the issue of fairness. Sometimes it is indeed difficult to reach, and there's no stated reason for me to believe that a subjective opinion should have to be earned to be "worthy". Some people drop and then rate things. They are still honest people, and people in their group are part of MAL's (supposedly valued) userbase. Letting them equally influence the ratings will help them better know what and what not to try watching or reading, and also increases fairness while reducing arbitrariness. "if you're so desperate to have your opinion counted by the system" is just more nonsense. I'm interested in having other honest voters being counted. I already stated that I complete almost all anime I start watching, so you are ignoring me and/or quickly skimming my posts, but then create fantasies that you want to attribute to me. Please stop it. It's silly. "It's a rank. A number. Does it really hurt that much to see something you don't like in a high position? Because that's the only reason I can see for you to be stressing how UNFAIR the current system is." is assuming things obviously meant to make me look bad. I value fairness and usefulness in ratings. You having a negative or limited mind shouldn't be justification to both ignore everything I've been saying and then try to make me look bad. Vote for option four instead if you want. "I can only end by paraphrasing what Xjellocross said: It's just a ranking, get over it." is just the statement of another person who chooses to ignore me and then pretend that I'm someone else that is easier to make look bad. Truly an excellent way to discuss things. "It did not mess up." is subjective; messing up is in the eye of the beholder. Your defiances and excuses do not change the fact that people honestly have other opinions and deserve to be counted, as they are not your inferiors. "In no way am I blaming people for fleeing it, all I'm saying is that their vote should not count." is silly. Take a less selfish position, please. Apparently most people felt that Gintama sucked enough to make them drop it early. The rating should reflect this, as it would be representing Gintama's average level of "goodness" more accurately then, which would prevent many people in the future from being disappointed by watching it, because its rating is currently claiming that few people dislike it, when that is not actually the case. Do you see how this is less selfish? Probably not, because you're a total Gintama fanboy, who would rather degrade information and the ignore the value of others just to keep Gintama rated high. Of course I can't prove this, but it's probably 90% likely. "I constantly..." is an anecdote. Guess what, MAL exists for more people than you. Maybe it would be nice to accommodate less extreme people, who are more common. MAL is actually so popular because it's so user- and socialization-friendly. Recommending that everyone "just try harder" is contrary to something that greatly helped MAL become what it is today. "I can't really see a link between people not having their votes count and being "inferior". Their votes only don't count because they haven't seen enough of the anime to rate them accurately, not because their view isn't as good (sure, its fine for that episode, but not the series as a whole.)" is just...come on. So censoring people's opinions isn't obviously claiming that they shouldn't get to have opinions? Accurately? HAHAHA! As if people can be accurately subjective. Just use the completed rating list if you want only "immutable" votes to be counted. Well, you're probably ignoring what I say like many others, so you probably will just say some more nonsense for selfish reasons that don't consider everyone as your equal. "But I definitely have a better opinion" is bullshit. Your subjectivity is nothing special, EVER. "Fairness is completely subjective. You see the 1/5 rule as unfair, I see it as fair. I'm sure theres plenty of others in both categories as well. You cannot argue that you are promoting fairness." is more nonsense. So others than me can see it as fair or see something else as fair, but I can't say that I'm promoting fairness? What makes me the only person in the world who deserves to be ignored? "Theres not much different between seeing nothing, and seeing say 1% of something." SO LOOK AT THE COMPLETED RATINGS!!!!!! Do you understand how even you would have something to be happy about under my suggestion? Of course not, because you selfishly would rather maintain unfairness rather than admit that a class of users that you don't like are just as important as you are. If you find looking at the overall ratings under my suggestion irritating then YOU can simply not look at them. "Nobody is forcing them to watch it. If they hate it - drop it. I'm pretty sure they won't watch a certain number of episodes just so their individual vote counts, nor will they care about their individual vote, and whether or not it counts. Sure, they may care about the overall rating, but definitely not their vote." shows that you simply don't understand and/or read anything that I said on this. Ratings shouldn't be meant for fanboys and haters of things to drool and fight over. New people would have better experiences if the ratings included people like them in the rating calculations. Option four is still there... "The way I see it" is more anecdotal subjectivity. Do you see how I barely mention how I would benefit under my suggestion, but instead focus on the overall effect it would have? That's because I'm trying not to be selfish. I wouldn't even demand credit or acknowledgment if my suggestion was implemented. divito, you say a lot of nonsense, but this is especially ridiculous: "What good is a ranking of an anime that someone might have made based simply on the title of it? That should be equally valid?". READ MY WORDS IN THIS THREAD BEFORE YOU INSULT ME. Only knowing the title would require that one lied to MAL about seeing part of it to count under my suggestion (or under the current system; there is no difference, yet you say such irrational things!). MY SUGGESTION IS UNRELATED TO CHEATERS! Go burn your straw men arguments elsewhere! lollypatrolly, just let Xinil decide on what's too muck of a bother. You only need to think about how to increase fairness in the rating system. I'm sure Xinil can decide the technical side of things for himself. BY THE WAY, does any democracy weight or filter the votes its honest citizens make only once, under the rules? If that's truly more "fair" or "accurate" then why isn't it popular for something so critical to huge numbers of people? COULD IT BE THAT IT SIMPLY SUCKS ASS?! Just vote for option four and leave the thread if you really feel so superior, please. As if you can honestly vote for option two but exclude others due to selfishness and/or elitism. Get real. Also, I wish people would stop bringing up the unrelated issue of whether or not something unpopular deserves a top rank here. Adjusting the number or value of bayesian votes isn't something I made a suggestion for in this thread. I agree that a self-selected minority who are fans of applicable genres and/or themes are very unrepresentative of what an average MAL user would find good or valuable. Few people care about this, though, and my suggestion here doesn't, either. I'm saving time by not rereading my post, so please forgive me for any errors and ask me in a calm, rational, nonflaming way if you want more information. Ignoring things I've stated clearly multiple times and assuming motivations or other arguments that I never stated is childish, though. |
If you're stingy then click on CLuClu! Please consider supporting the end of disenfranchisement on MAL. Purpose is subjective, therefore quality is subjective. |
divito said: This is a very valid point. A good anime to use as an example is Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo. It has the strangest distribution of ratings I've seen on mal... Also alot of 1 ratings seem to have a -/76, although I''m not sure if this is because they dropped after 5 minutes or based on the name...What good is a ranking of an anime that someone might have made based simply on the title of it? That should be equally valid? How, as a fan looking for more anime to watch, does that help me in any way whatsoever? Why should I get inaccurate advice because irrational and illogical rankings are viewed equally, instead of taking in legitimate votes based on people who have seen it? http://myanimelist.net/anime/1050/Bobobo-bo_Bo-bobo/stats&order=&show=2750&m=all&show=2700 When I'm looking for anime to dl, I look for an anime with a description/picture that I like, and a decent rating to go along with it (usually 7.5+, but 7+ if I feel I would really like it). The point here, is that I can (and I'm sure most people) usually tell if I would enjoy animes based on their description. You obviously wouldn't watch Bobobo if you don't enjoy strange humour - which I'm sure the picture and the first line of the description give away (Bo Bobo is a man with the incredible power of hearing the voices of hair and using his own to fight. ). Now, why should the people who hate it, and drop it after acouple of episodes have their vote count? People who wouldn't like it should already know if they wouldn't like it, but how would people who enjoy that type of anime judge if its worth watching or not? The rating, or just diving straight in. Now, I understand that the OPs system would fix this problem, but whats the point? The current system fixes this problem well enough, as people who hate it usually drop it before the 15th episode. There is really no benefit to this new system that the current one doesn't have, and it only causes more problems and boost effects. Even if a person could not tell if they would like the anime, doesn't the stats page tell if lots of people hate the anime and drop it early? I don't see the point of a new rating for something so easy to determine. Daisuki-chan said: Obviously its subjective, but thats the point. I did not in any way try to claim it was objective, which would be impossible anyway. When there are no facts that can be called objective, how can I reply without being subjective? Trying to pass off subjectivity as objectivity is when people don't include statemetns such as "To me" or "imo" etc. is trying to pass off subjectivity as objectivity and make a "true" judgement on what is justified. is subjective; messing up is in the eye of the beholder. Your defiances and excuses do not change the fact that people honestly have other opinions and deserve to be counted, as they are not your inferiors. See above - both my reply to your first quote and before your first quote. Take a less selfish position, please. Apparently most people felt that Gintama sucked enough to make them drop it early. The rating should reflect this, as it would be representing Gintama's average level of "goodness" more accurately then, which would prevent many people in the future from being disappointed by watching it, because its rating is currently claiming that few people dislike it, when that is not actually the case. Do you see how this is less selfish? Probably not, because you're a total Gintama fanboy, who would rather degrade information and the ignore the value of others just to keep Gintama rated high. Of course I can't prove this, but it's probably 90% likely. Saying that they should not count is no more "selfish" than saying that they should count. My point, as I've said countless times, is simply that MAL ratings are meant to reflect the OVERALL quality of an anime, not the quality of the first 2 episodes. If they weren't, why would the 1/5 requirement by implemented in the first place?"I constantly..." is an anecdote. Guess what, MAL exists for more people than you. Maybe it would be nice to accommodate less extreme people, who are more common. MAL is actually so popular because it's so user- and socialization-friendly. Recommending that everyone "just try harder" is contrary to something that greatly helped MAL become what it is today. Guess what, your right about the anecdote. You can't simply disregard my opinion and than decide that average users don't look at episode discussion polls. In all likelihood, a lot do. Why not make a poll on it before you say that they don't?Just use the completed rating list if you want only "immutable" votes to be counted. Well, you're probably ignoring what I say like many others, so you probably will just say some more nonsense for selfish reasons that don't consider everyone as your equal. See above, I simply see no benefit in the lists over the current ones. Selfish - maybe, but you obviously can't see the flaws in your own system. Some have been listed in the previous pages, but you selfishly just push them aside."But I definitely have a better opinion" is bullshit. Your subjectivity is nothing special, EVER. Quote taken out of context. Its subjective, yes, but a subjective opinion is ALWAYS more accurate than a person who doesn't even have an opinion on the later episodes. So others than me can see it as fair or see something else as fair, but I can't say that I'm promoting fairness? What makes me the only person in the world who deserves to be ignored? Say it all you want, and while many will agree, many others will see it as exactly the opposite. SO LOOK AT THE COMPLETED RATINGS!!!!!! Do you understand how even you would have something to be happy about under my suggestion? With what I've said before this post, your comment is fair enough. Yes, I would have something to be happy about, but the bit I am happy about isn't really much different from the current system. Of course not, because you selfishly would rather maintain unfairness rather than admit that a class of users that you don't like are just as important as you are. If you find looking at the overall ratings under my suggestion irritating then YOU can simply not look at them. Let's rephrase this, "Of course not, because you selfishly would rather maintain fairness rather than admit that a class of users that you don't like are just as important as you are." See where I'm coming from with my point about fairness? ...shows that you simply don't understand and/or read anything that I said on this. Ratings shouldn't be meant for fanboys and haters of things to drool and fight over. New people would have better experiences if the ratings included people like them in the rating calculations. Option four is still there... How aren't new peoples ratings including in the calculations? New people complete series too. I understand what your saying, but I just can't see it as being fair to judge an entire series on a few episodes. You may dislike the characters, but characters do often grow on you over time. Really, the only thing you can judge after acouple of episodes is the animation, and even that changes over time. Another thing to mention about the poll is that, if it was a simple "Yes/No" many of the votes for "I don't care" would be reclassified as no. If they don't care, it implies that they don't mind the current system. That being said, they may agree with you, but as people have posted, they believe it would simply be a waste of time. |
llamabenApr 29, 2010 6:25 PM
| You wanted opinions and responses from the users of MAL. I am a user of MAL. You have no right to tell me to leave simply because I see your suggestion as useless and a waste of time. The fact that you dismiss every dissenting opinion as childish or elitist does not help you in any way. You keep saying that the current list is unfair and that your idea is. Is this not that word “subjective” that you keep throwing around? There is a reason I tossed in phrases such as “the way I see it” or “in my opinion”. I didn’t want my words to be treated as if I was speaking facts. I certainly do not see the current list as unfair. If you don't watch the anime, your rating doesn't need to count. That's my opinion. I don't see two lists as being necessary in this point in time and I certainly do not want to current list to be replaced by what I can only see (KEY WORDS HERE: “I CAN ONLY SEE”. MY OPINION. NOT SPEAKING FACTS) as a farce of a representation for "fairness". was already responded to by me, but I guess it's fine to ignore me if you're "sure" you're right. What was your response? CPU cycles? That was point number 2, not 3. is telling me that you should judge what should happen for MAL based on what you subjectively favor and what you subjectively find "remarkably" trivial, despite me explaining how useful ratings can be. Xinil can come here and (even briefly) say one of three types of things: "Your suggestion is good and I will try to implement it soon.", "Your suggestion is good and I will try to implement it after some other things of my choice.", or "I won't be persuaded to implement your suggestion at any time.". I'm not going to accept a non-Xinil speaking for Xinil. Oh yes, ratings are useful. We also have reviews. A well written review speaks so much more than a simple number. Recommendations exist as well although they’re definitely not…anywhere close to being the most useful things in the world. You can also check what scores your friends have designated for a series. These things along with the rating all exist to help you decide what to watch. If you choose not to utilize them, that’s your problem.And I’m not speaking for Xinil. Where did I ever say my word was his word? Obviously, if he comes in and says “I like this” then I have no room for argument. But for now, he has yet to say anything. I’m speaking for myself. There are so many things on this site that are broken or in dire need for implementation right now. That was my point. If, by any chance, everything else is fixed and added sometime in the future then sure, a second list can go straight up onto the site for all I care. But as of now, this is something that is simply not needed. "difficult to reach" is subjective and ignores the issue of fairness. Sometimes it is indeed difficult to reach, and there's no stated reason for me to believe that a subjective opinion should have to be earned to be "worthy". Some people drop and then rate things. They are still honest people, and people in their group are part of MAL's (supposedly valued) userbase. Letting them equally influence the ratings will help them better know what and what not to try watching or reading, and also increases fairness while reducing arbitrariness. I’m not going to debate subjectivity here with you simply because it won’t go anywhere. If you can’t recognize that your idea of “fairness” is just as subjective as my own, there is nothing we can say to each other about it. I never said people who drop things early and rate them are dishonest, inferior, or whatever other assumption you’ve made throughout this thread. I drop things early on and slap ratings on them as well. Of course, those ratings are for my own purposes and anyone who happens to trust my ratings. If I couldn’t even watch one-fifth of a show before forming an opinion about it, I’d rather my opinion not be counted by the system as it’s clear I hardly gave it a chance at all. Now, with long running shows, this is obviously different and your system would most definitely be somewhat useful in that area. But I’ll circle back to my previous posts about how not too many of them exist to begin with. Practicality is again an issue in my opinion. is just more nonsense. I'm interested in having other honest voters being counted. I already stated that I complete almost all anime I start watching, so you are ignoring me and/or quickly skimming my posts, but then create fantasies that you want to attribute to me. Please stop it. It's silly. Nothing I can say here. That was my mistake. is assuming things obviously meant to make me look bad. I value fairness and usefulness in ratings. You having a negative or limited mind shouldn't be justification to both ignore everything I've been saying and then try to make me look bad. Vote for option four instead if you want. I’m sorry, but I couldn’t help but chuckle a little here. If you’re going to resort to ad hominem, please at least be a little more subtle and witty about it. I’ll take it more seriously. And I’ve already voted for option 5, thank you very much. I’ll turn it back around by the way. “I value fairness and usefulness in ratings” seems like a cheap attempt to make yourself look better. Of course for all I know, you may truly not have any selfish intentions here at all. Just pointing out how your argument can be used against you.As for the rest of your post, I’ll refrain from responding as I’ll just end up repeating myself. I can only fall back onto the childish comeback that has virally invaded Internet communities across the world. u mad Now, I guess it's time I take my leave from this thread as it's clear I won't be convincing you of anything within the next hundred years. Good luck with this. |
XjellocrossApr 28, 2010 8:38 PM
Daisuki-chan said: Maybe I'm just being dumb but this entire statement doesn't make sense to me. How did I ignore you and how did I pretend that you were someone else? "I can only end by paraphrasing what Xjellocross said: It's just a ranking, get over it." is just the statement of another person who chooses to ignore me and then pretend that I'm someone else that is easier to make look bad. Truly an excellent way to discuss things. I have simply gotten tired of trying to discuss this with you because you clearly aren't going to change your mind on the current system being unfair. I don't think it's unfair, you do. That's it. |
Xjellocross said: And I will reiterate, why does it matter? These are numbers used to give users a quick idea of how good an anime is at a glance. Popularity does not denote quality. It's not some stupid voting contest. Does it really matter whether 4, 5, and 6 are below 1, 2, and 3? The way I see it, everything in the top 100 can be switched around randomly and it wouldn't make a difference. Because it does matter. Popularity grows when something is good anyway. 2000, out of which, 1200 e.g. give 10 to something. Okay, cool. But it's rather more impressive when out of 30,000, 16,000 gave it a 10. It's not only about the percentage. Everyone is different, likes different things. If this anime was adored by so many different people, then that's something. While those 1,300 are actually same kind of people, they like this genre, they think the anime's cool. But for some people who are not fans of the genre it won't be as enjoyable as for them. Like I said, I srsly don't care and probably also will leave this thread since I can't understand a thing here D: More like it's too much to read, not interested. But that doesn't change the fact that it really is unfair. And to whoever said he watches only 7,5+ and higher, and even 7+ when in the mood - oh wow. Where did you find something below 7, I can't even-- ps: Just smt to add: The TOP 100 is ultimate, it's for all users combined. If you want the best mecha, go make yourself a TOP mecha list. But this list is supposed to present us animes that almost everyone will like, considering how many people gave it such a high rating, no matter what genre they are fan of. Just a quick example: I'm NOT a shoujo fan but I loved Kimi ni Todoke. How's that? I don't friggin care what materials are used for Suzaku's mecha, I just love Code Geass. Oh wow. I'm sure I'm not the only one. I don't even think I have other mecha in my list. |
Nao-staniApr 29, 2010 2:50 AM
| |
More topics from this board
» We need more DB admins who aren't racist.Nyron - Mar 23 |
10 |
by Oppai_Loli_God
»»
3 hours ago |
|
» Add Country of Origin Tag / Chinese and Korean cartoons should be called something else ( 1 2 )zombie_pegasus - Jul 9, 2017 |
54 |
by Aggnog
»»
Mar 26, 6:19 PM |
|
» Music videos counted as watched Anime?GersonSalas - Mar 23 |
9 |
by LittleStar
»»
Mar 26, 1:57 PM |
|
» Way to directly access your reviews from your "Reviews" page.thewiru - Mar 25 |
5 |
by thewiru
»»
Mar 25, 5:16 PM |
|
» English titlesKappejoj - Mar 24 |
2 |
by Xcbtwo
»»
Mar 25, 1:39 PM |