Sunday, May 8, 2011

Info: Score system


I've got many questions about my rating system, and many commentors have asked me why I give scores between 1 and 6, and not 1 and 5 or 1 and 10 like for instance IMDB does. The reason is simple; how many sides have a regulary dice? Exactly, six. When I give a score, it's much like rolling the dice. I dont now what score a documentary or a show will get before I've seen it.

I prefer this system rather than giving 1 to 10 scores, because I think it's easier. 1 and 2 is for stuff I don't recommend, where 1 is just a waste of time. 3 is for subjects I find uninteresting, or at least presented in such a way, and/or have under average production. 4 and 5 is for stuff I like and recommend, and 6 is a must watch.

With a scala from 1 to 10, this would be much harder. What would a 3 equal on scala from 1 to 10? 4? 5? 6? And I would have to justify why I gave a documentary a 5 and not a 4. Or a 4 but not a 5. Think about it; much more work.

I like to keep it simple, and I think my dice system is exactly that. I hope this clarifies it. Still any questions? Feel free to ask.

31 comments:

  1. Your scale works very well! I like!

    ReplyDelete
  2. In general 10pts scales are too much (i used to be on a site where we did album reviews on a scale of 10 including halves, complete mess), for movies the 5-star (or six, whatever suits you) is more than enough for the reader to understand how much you recommend something.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm not really a fan of giving numbers to art. When I become a big film critic I will change it. =)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Same way when it comes to these kinds of things, 1-5.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I actually rate things with lame, meh, good, awesome, and freaking awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  6. well, i agree. But i guess every system has it's own advantages. What is the purpose of a rating, especially of something like movies? And what is the consequences?
    I'd say the result is purely binary: either you will watch it, either you won't. So the system could be just: must watch / waste of time.
    Other systems are for people who can't have a strong opinion about what they watch, so they rely on a relative ranking: it's 4/6, so when i watch it and it's mostly waste of time, i can just blame the rating.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I like the way this system works, good thinking

    ReplyDelete
  8. Huh, that's pretty interesting. Put it into practice

    ReplyDelete
  9. I thought for a second you were going to reveal that your true method of deciding rating was by rolling a dice. Good to see that there is more to it!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Also forces people to not give the "middle" rating aka 3.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I like your dice system, sounds convenient!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dice system... 7 is the most likely...

    ReplyDelete
  13. SCORE! lol haha great didn't know that

    ReplyDelete
  14. I like your reasoning for the score system. Not something I would be capable of doing though, I'm far too kind to review my games, so I just simply talk about it and let the reader decide if it's worth their time or not...

    ReplyDelete
  15. That's an interesting perspective on a rating system! I've never heard of someone correlating a rating to dice. Dice are cool though. Always reminds me craps.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Never played but I will definitely use this system if I ever decide to.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Dices for the win, I actually prefer it to 1-10 and the alike.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I prefer 1 - 10 score systems.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I will definitely use this system

    ReplyDelete
  20. ha, i asked that question too. Thx for your reasoning as to why you use it. maybe you should bump it up to 7 though. but only use the 7 rating for things that if people dont watch their lives will actually be in danger.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I like 1 to 10, but I dislike the 'anything under 8 sucks' mentality that a lot of places have bred.

    ReplyDelete