Feel free to talk with me about Re:Zero, just try to hold a conversation sturdier than Okeanix if you want me not to laugh.
Me & Anime:
When life isn't pulling me elsewhere I watch anime and review it every now and then. I'm usually rather quiet but I don't mind the occasional discussion. Otherwise my activity here is sporadic and lengthy periods of inactivity are normal for me.
My thoughts on almost everything I've watched can be found in the comment sections of my list. I'm slowly filling in the rest.
Can you read this as a rating philosophy? Sure, if you want to. If you couldn't care less about ratings, then it's just what it says on the tin. Dissecting what I watch often provides opportunities for deeper understanding (or at the very least, its own amusement) so I do it like this.
The general attributes I care about:
*** - Plot ~ Everything involving the story & characters, and how they were used. My main focus is on structure (how) and purpose (why), as I've found that plots which can maintain those aspects are far more likely to be effective in telling an interesting story. Plots do not need to be complex, just compelling.
* - Effects ~ Animation, sound, et cetera in relation to what is necessitated by the plot. It can't just be pretty for its own sake; these need to be used effectively.
* - Cohesion ~ How much the anime's elements flow with or clash against one another. It's what separates the campy from the trash, why something you can tell is well-made can still bore you, et cetera. It embodies the idea that separated parts don't always equal the value of the whole when tallied together.
Things I don't care about:
Complexity ~ Complexity seems to get confused with depth quite often. It's not even a prerequisite for depth, it's merely how much work it takes to understand something, which isn't a meaningful trait on its own. Depth, the possibilities that arise from what is understood, is something I do care about.
Novelty ~ One of the most overrated aspects of storytelling, in my opinion. A hundred well-told stories that follow a similar structure are still well-told, and a hundred poorly written stories that are one-of-a-kind are still poorly written. Execution supersedes any inherent value that I've seen novelty be claimed to possess.
Enjoyment ~ No, this isn't to say I don't enjoy anime. Much the opposite. It's so easy for me to enjoy anime (and for the most minute reasons) that it's not a distinguishing factor.
Rewatchability ~ I rarely rewatch, and it's always either to confirm details for discussion/reviewing or for the sake of experiencing multiple dubs. I consider it no more a part of the experience than a reflection of it.
Prior Releases ~ My ratings are based on the latest version of an anime to be released (that I'm aware of / have access to). If a studio takes the time to make changes in a new version, I will consider that new version to be the only official version. This isn't to be confused with alternate versions (i.e. Toei's Kanon adaptation vs KyoAni's Kanon adaptation) rather it's when the same entry is re-released with updates.
What my rating is about:
The last and least important. It's mostly just a minigame for me, and the rest is convenient organization via numerical shorthand. I put effort into it, but merely because I find it fun (see what I mean about being able to enjoy anime for minute reasons?)
I rate between 0-100 (0.0/10.0). I used to post an /11 conversion scale, but it overcomplicates things. The idea is to make my ratings a gradient rather than have sharp cutoffs for their meaning. Numbers like 87 & 88 aren't so different from each other, even if that's my line between 8 & 9 if you were to ask me for an /10 rating. "96-100" (my "10/10") is special, but not sacred or impossible. Chances are good that if I gave an anime a 30 or higher, then there is something I genuinely liked about it (though at <60 it's easier for me to remember things I could see done better). You can probably guess the meaning behind the numbers I use with those notions in mind.
In other words, If you rate Madoka & Hyouka a 1/10 and Code Geass & ERASED a 10/10, it doesn't mean I hate you or think your taste is trash. We likely just have vastly different preferences and don't understand each other's tastes.
It means the rating I gave represents multiple separated entries within the same list entry. Presently there are two cases where I will do this:
1. When it makes more sense to rate an entry's episodes standalone rather than as a singular experience. Example: Steins;Gate: Soumei Eichi no Cognitive Computing, in which each episode is a separate advertisement for IBM's Cognitive Computing initiative. There is no encompassing story between them.
2. When various dubs of the same entry are so different from each other that they are completely different experiences. Example: Ghost Stories, in which the original Japanese dub adapts a book series and the English dub infamously spoofs it instead by rewriting the entire cast, changing many minor plot points, and making it a comedy-focused series rather than a horror-focused one.
"But what are you about?":
If you want to know more about me specifically, feel free to ask. What you just scrolled past read about my anime preferences is me attempting to be brief. I'm not good at cutting to the chase in discussion and we'd be here forever if I went anywhere else with this page.
9-10 = Very yes.
7-8 = Yes.
5-6 = Only if you were interested to begin with.
3-4 = No.
≤2 = Tell me what about it made you consider watching it in the first place and I can probably tell you why it fails to provide that.
+1 scale level to anime tagged as Camp. Those have a special appeal outside of their actual quality.
Fate/Zero [At least Season 1]
It should be noted that I rarely re-watch anything unless I'm re-assessing my opinion on it, so that's what this list really represents.