Report Scizoro's Profile


Anime Stats
Days: 56.5
Mean Score: 8.22
  • Total Entries206
  • Rewatched0
  • Episodes3,341
Anime History Last Anime Updates
Aug 6, 9:35 AM
Watching 46/201 · Scored -
Bakemono no Ko
Bakemono no Ko
Jul 9, 11:11 AM
Completed 1/1 · Scored 8
One Punch Man 2nd Season
One Punch Man 2nd Season
Jul 3, 1:09 PM
Completed 12/12 · Scored 7
Manga Stats
Days: 0.0
Mean Score: 0.00
  • Total Entries0
  • Reread0
  • Chapters0
  • Volumes0
Manga History Last Manga Updates

No updates yet.


All Comments (3) Comments

Would you like to post a comment? Please login or sign up first!
ZephSilver Jan 10, 2017 6:34 PM
You should be a politician. I'm sure most would get a kick out of this response. And don't worry, I got no impression of you, my statement is addressing a hivemind mentality adopted by most that buzz around to ask the age old question of "ratings low, you must hate anime." A statement that should be reserved for 2nd graders but sadly isn't. Explaining ratings in this day and age seems counterproductive. Doubly so when the general platform on MAL doesn't use the ratings the way the creators of the site intended. I think I would be happier had someone approach me saying "why you rate things using the correct method?" at least that would give me the idea that someone for once isn't unaware of the irony of what they ask.

And that mean chart score says nothing since you can't exactly formulaically measure out what shows you would value more than others. It's not like I could set up a quota of what to watch to keep the thing even on one side or the other.
"I would rather appreciate no reply than an uneducated assumption about myself."
"I was just wondering why do you continue to watch anime even if mostly everything you've seen is generally poorly rated. I mean if someone doesn't like something they would stop doing that thing, right?"

Your approach was well intentioned but it doesn't mean you weren't using uneducated assumptions yourself. I don't see how you're allowed to when others aren't. And addressing the example of if I rated your favorites with 10 was simply that, an example. That was not addressing you alone, especially when I'm addressing a collective "people."

This doesn't even have anything to do with you at this point, I'm just annoyed by the recent influx of idiotic responses that I seem to get addressing the same question. But that's all the rambling I would do for this convo, this would be my final response. Adios and thanks for keeping it civil.

ZephSilver Jan 10, 2017 2:44 AM
if that's what you got then you didn't process what I said correctly. I clearly stated that enjoyment to me is another segment of the whole, I don't view it and ratings separately. They're all worked into what I rate something:
"I take into account all aspects of the show and enjoyment is just another segment of the bigger picture"
And the only copy pasta is what I have in quotations, everything else I typed up.

And let's be honest here, people only care what others rate things because they feel like a lower score for something they like is like a personal attack against their intellect. People have no self-confidence and take scores to heart. A score for a show has nothing to do with other people liking it or not. Had I rated everything you liked with 10s and everything else low, you wouldn't have even batted an eye but because your favorite shows were probably among the clutter, you took it to heart, despite the fact that the ratings aren't delegated to the lopsided way that a majority of MAL users adopt.
That's an unhealthy bias but hey, whatever works for you. I enjoy whatever I consume all the same, I just choose to make a conscious effort in discerning the fast food from the well prepared.
ZephSilver Jan 8, 2017 6:03 PM
I'm tired of answering this question, so I'm going to make this the most detailed explanation possible, just so I could copy and paste it for the next 50 people to ask me this by the end of the month. I've pretty much added the reason into my profile but seeing that no one reads it, I'll just quote that here.
"Just because I rate something low doesn't necessarily mean I "hate" it. Keep in mind my scores aren't indicative of whether I fully enjoyed something or not, but rather I take into account all aspects of the show and enjoyment is just another segment of the bigger picture. It reflects how much I personally value them, not some be-all-end-all indication of quality."

So let's make it this as clear as possibly by giving a simple analogy, I could rate something a 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and in every rating, there could be a show I like. McDonalds is unhealthy and poorly made, but I still enjoy it for its expedients. If it was rated, it would be a 1-4 range. Steak n Shake could be seen as a step above that, as they generally place far more effort into their customer service and their burgers usually taste better, so 5-6 range. Applebees and local diners are a step up in that they have far more effort in customer service and they actually cook their meals, making them more savory but still not restaurant quality, so maybe 6-7. And a 5-star restaurant is probably going to be made to perfection, with the utmost effort in everything resulting in an absolutely delicious dish and experience, so 8-10 range.

I could enjoy all of these different food establishments BUT they're not made in the same caliber or to the same capacity. Some are clearly better tasting and made with far more effort than the others. No one is saying you can't like them all, but to value McDonalds with the same vigor you do Restaurant de l’Hôtel de Ville is absurd.

So adapt that mindset to how I rate things. Sure, I may enjoy the sleazy ecchi/harem or paint-by-the-numbers battle shounen but that doesn't mean I'll hold them at the same level as something that goes beyond the basic requirements that make all these shows bleed into each other.

And also, my ranking scale further expands onto my feelings in general for most scores I give. I don't think it's a matter of my scores being too low, as it's mostly people not using the 1-10 scale as it's intended to be used. It's not supposed to be a school grading scale, where 9-10 are As, 8s are Bs and 7s are Cs. It even says so in the brackets for each score. 5 is average, 7 is good, 4 is bad, 10 is masterpiece etc. If I enjoy an average show, it doesn't change the fact that it's average. If I enjoy a terribly written show, it doesn't change the fact that it's terribly written. Scores are values and as such, I don't just value everything at the same level. I think that's a waste of time. How is someone suppose to know what you value more if literally everything you rate is 7-10? At that point, you're only using 30% of the scoring system. So if Cs are the average score and 5s by definition is the average on a 1 to 10 scale, then that means realistically speaking, someone who's scoring things accordingly would have an average score around 5 (which I do). If anything, the problem is most other people not being able to realize that just because you score something a 5 doesn't mean that you hate it or just because you rate it a 7 means that it wasn't good enough. If everyone used the 1-10 scale as it was intended to then I wouldn't be the only one standing out. But that isn't the case.

In short, scores does not determine what I enjoy, it determins how much I value it. In the same way McDonalds, Steak n Shake, Applebees, Bob Evans, Restaurant de l’Hôtel de Ville are all food establisments made at varying degrees of effort. This doesn't mean there's not expections to this rule, this is a general idea after all, but for the most part, it's the easiest way to understand where I'm coming from.