jal90 said:
I doubt that people who claim -if they actually do- that no series could be worth of 1-2s have been exposed to shows that are so abhorrently bad for them that defy their preconceptions. But anyway, people in general don't give 1-2s simply because they don't watch stuff that deserves 1-2s.
I'm not talking about people who simply haven't been given the chance to rate a series a 1-2, but given say 200 entries, surely you would reach something that really is that bad. For example, you could have tried out some popular series merely to see what makes them popular, and only for it to not suit your tastes.
And it doesn't have to be in the completed list either. I often drop shows that I give 1-5, and my dropped list is generally full of 1-5s, since I wouldn't want to spend more time than I have to watching a show that I don't like. Even if you were to only watch recommended shows, I don't think you could possibly never encounter a show that is legitimately worth such a low rating.
jal90 said:
Second point. The symmetry. I guess what you mean, but we are not robots. Therefore, our rating is biased towards our viewing trends. Since people tend to pick the shows trying to fit their tastes it's only normal that the average is higher than how it should be with an homogeneous set of ratings.
I'm not talking about symmetry in terms of the rating distribution of all your completed shows. I'm talking about how you determine a rating, e.g., what it means for a show to be a 1,2,3,etc. I do agree with you, and argued this in a previous post on page 11:
nil- said: If you have a symmetric (or close to symmetric) rating distribution, then that must mean one of three things:
1. You are very very critical of your anime, almost to a non-logical viewpoint.
2. You indiscriminately choose anime at random.
3. You simply watch a LOT of anime and hence must watch a lot of the mediocre ones. (But then again, if you keep at this rate, the distribution will eventually just skew towards the 3-4s and etc.)
It's clear that if you always go for recommended or "top" anime, you'd be more likely to rate the series more highly than a random one. On that note, a "good" distribution should then skew towards the 7-8s. But then again, we're talking about distributions here, and who really cares?
jal90 said:
You again assume more things than the ones you have. If I like a show, I see no point in giving it a 1-5, because 5 sets the limit where I start to dislike what I watch. Therefore, I'm not giving a 3 to something I legitimately enjoy only because my levels of enjoyment exceed the number of ratings I have to describe them. After all, I have a scale of ten numbers to apply on (potentially) thousands of shows. Assuming that there won't be big discrepancies even at the scale of one number is pretty absurd.
As I stated, the suggestion that you probably haven't downsized your scores appropriately surely does not apply to everyone. But people do in fact make this mistake, and it occurs more often than not, to the point that this is the most commonly used counterpoint against those who want a decimal rating system (source: search for this suggestion, and you'll see this counterpoint always brought up). In general, I would also like to claim that if most people can't manage a 1-10 rating system well, then a 1-100 rating scale would be enormously difficult. Personally, I couldn't possibly tell the difference between, say, an 83 and 84/100.
However, I'm still in favor of a decimal rating system since I do like the option of more ratings, and if one prefers only 1-10, then just doing 10,20,30,../100 is perfectly fine. For me, I would just like increments of .5.
On a sidenote, I like the mature discussion! |