Rating System Uses
strange
Saturday, October 14, 2006 by kenwas | Discussion: Community
I hope that this is not viewed as our usual monthly rant about the rating system. It is what it is, fairer than some, less fair than others. No rating system is perfect and this one does give the community the opportunity to state its opinion. I do not understand however, what the site then does with the ratings. Let me see if I have this right.....
If you DO NOT PAY (not a current subscriber) you get to see only the works which the community has deemed it best through the rating system. In the Wall section, this means a rating of 4 stars (8) or better.
Now, if you DO PAY, , as a subscriber you get to see the works that were deemed to be average or below as well. This logic progresses that if there were an option for an extra subscription payment, well, why then you could also see the work that was rejected!
This makes no sense to me.
The only ones penalized by this use of the rating system are the people who pay and can upload as much of the work will never be seen by the "public". Certainly only subscribers should have the right to vote. But that is a narrow segment of the viewers and it would be interesting to see how the actual downloads would look if all submissions were equally accessible to the public viewer ratings and all.
Now, if the goal is to reduce traffic and bandwidth usage then is policy makes sense. But that is a strange goal for a site that exists to show graphic representation of the uses of its products and to encourage people interested in customizing their desktop to give it a go.
If you DO NOT PAY (not a current subscriber) you get to see only the works which the community has deemed it best through the rating system. In the Wall section, this means a rating of 4 stars (8) or better.
Now, if you DO PAY, , as a subscriber you get to see the works that were deemed to be average or below as well. This logic progresses that if there were an option for an extra subscription payment, well, why then you could also see the work that was rejected!
This makes no sense to me.
The only ones penalized by this use of the rating system are the people who pay and can upload as much of the work will never be seen by the "public". Certainly only subscribers should have the right to vote. But that is a narrow segment of the viewers and it would be interesting to see how the actual downloads would look if all submissions were equally accessible to the public viewer ratings and all.
Now, if the goal is to reduce traffic and bandwidth usage then is policy makes sense. But that is a strange goal for a site that exists to show graphic representation of the uses of its products and to encourage people interested in customizing their desktop to give it a go.
 |
|
Page 2 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Jafo
Reply #22 Thursday, October 19, 2006 10:06 PM
Reply #22 Thursday, October 19, 2006 10:06 PM
The wall/visibility/rating/downloads equation is simply about download bandwidth usage....for something that is still only one adjunct to skinning.
If walls were 'treated equally'....and most were accessible for download to the casual user then much more bandwidth would be 'taken' by casual wall hunters who would comprise a potentially large proportion of the passing user-base.
Limiting them to what the community 'rates' as the best may actually cause them to stop, say 'wow' and maybe actually join, Contributing to the community rather than just 'taking and leaving'...
_02
Reply #23 Thursday, October 19, 2006 10:27 PM
I am embarrassed to say that is not a side I ever thought of, Jafo. I think I can look at the subject of wallpaper ratings a little clearer now. I still think something should be done about the drive by and agenda ratings, make people responsible for them , but I see now why not all the walls can be seen by all. Sorry I was so thick about it.
Reply #23 Thursday, October 19, 2006 10:27 PM
| If walls were 'treated equally'....and most were accessible for download to the casual user then much more bandwidth would be 'taken' by casual wall hunters who would comprise a potentially large proportion of the passing user-base |
I am embarrassed to say that is not a side I ever thought of, Jafo. I think I can look at the subject of wallpaper ratings a little clearer now. I still think something should be done about the drive by and agenda ratings, make people responsible for them , but I see now why not all the walls can be seen by all. Sorry I was so thick about it.
Jafo
Reply #24 Thursday, October 19, 2006 11:34 PM
Reply #24 Thursday, October 19, 2006 11:34 PM
| Sorry I was so thick about it. |
Actually it's more the case of the site Admins being too 'thick' to explain it well...
Doh....
That'll be me...
Fairyy~
Reply #25 Friday, October 20, 2006 4:42 AM
That was a fair honest answer. I think most of us can live with that. Stardock isn't in the business to sell graphic programs to make desktop walls. The site's main product is Windowblinds so too much bandwith going to the wall gallery by the " just passing through " crowd takes away from the more important galleries...
Maybe if you put a tilde after your name....
Reply #25 Friday, October 20, 2006 4:42 AM
| The wall/visibility/rating/downloads equation is simply about download bandwidth usage....for something that is still only one adjunct to skinning. If walls were 'treated equally'....and most were accessible for download to the casual user then much more bandwidth would be 'taken' by casual wall hunters who would comprise a potentially large proportion of the passing user-base. |
That was a fair honest answer. I think most of us can live with that. Stardock isn't in the business to sell graphic programs to make desktop walls. The site's main product is Windowblinds so too much bandwith going to the wall gallery by the " just passing through " crowd takes away from the more important galleries...
| Actually it's more the case of the site Admins being too 'thick' to explain it well... Doh.... That'll be me. |
Maybe if you put a tilde after your name....
tawoods
Reply #26 Thursday, October 26, 2006 5:18 PM
Jafo~...NAH!!!!!!
Reply #26 Thursday, October 26, 2006 5:18 PM
| Maybe if you put a tilde after your name.... |
Jafo~...NAH!!!!!!
Fairyy~
Reply #29 Friday, October 27, 2006 8:16 AM
" Tilde or not Tilde - that is the question "
Reply #29 Friday, October 27, 2006 8:16 AM
| Jafotilde ..... |
" Tilde or not Tilde - that is the question "
Fairyy~
Reply #31 Friday, October 27, 2006 8:58 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I squiggle - therefore I am.
Reply #31 Friday, October 27, 2006 8:58 AM
| No, to squiggle or not to squiggle! |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I squiggle - therefore I am.
kenwas
Reply #33 Friday, October 27, 2006 9:33 AM
Reply #33 Friday, October 27, 2006 9:33 AM
The bandwidth issue as noted by Jafo makes perfect business sense to me and I accept it for what it is and appreciate the clarity of Paul's statement. The drive by rating shooters are another matter altogether and one that unfortunately just seems to go with the territory .
WOM
Reply #34 Friday, October 27, 2006 10:52 AM
Reply #34 Friday, October 27, 2006 10:52 AM
I don't really think the drive by raters are that much of a problem. Most are citizens, so their rating power is only a one. That will not hurt a wall/skin if members have rated it. So that would tell me, maybe people just didn't like something. Oh well.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 2 of 2 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Thursday, October 19, 2006 8:14 PM
I paid 19.95 just for that ..
I agree...4 stars should be a fantastic wall. But really what I had in mind is the fact that when a wall is visible to the public in a lot of cases it will get more downloads.
The wall that jazzymjr used in her preview for her Harvest Moon WB ( A wall in my opinion was a great Autumn wall " Copper Sunset " was made last year. In 1 year it had under 750 downloads ..basically because it had a 7 rating and once it passed the 5 days in the gallery before it was pretty much burried...then downloads faded away.
But since the Harvest Moon WB and accessories had a link to the " Copper Sunset " wall it has had almost 400 downloads in 10 or 12 days. Just an observation.
Every now and then i just search walls at wc and find burried treasures ..
Whoah...keep my squiggle out of this