Another rating question
Thursday, March 7, 2002 by WOM | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
I have looked at hundreds of skins and I'am puzzled! Some skinners have high ratings (9or10) and then have to go back numerous times and update problems (fixes) to their skins. How could the rating be so high if it doesn't work properly?
WOM
Reply #2 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:05 PM
Reply #2 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:05 PM
Thank you for your reply Master Mormegil. I understand updating your skin with enhancements but if a third of your skin needs fixed because it doesn't work how does it rate so high. I can see it getting a higher rating after the problem is fixed but not before then. Thats my question.
davad70
Reply #3 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:12 PM
Reply #3 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:12 PM
Sometimes the "flaw" may not be readily apparent to the person doing the rating. I download and try every WB skin that I rate, but I don't necesarily use for hours on end. Therefore, the "flaw" may not have been exposed to me. Now if a third of the skin was messed up, it would be obvious to the rater. However, I seriously doubt there are many skins that have that many errors that are rated a 9 or a 10 because it would be quite obvious. Also keep in mind that while we are supposed to try a skin before we use it, there are still some who rate based on the screenshot. That's not to say that every skin deserves the rating that it gets (both on the low end on the high end). The system is far from perfect, but many feel it's necessary, otherwise it wouldn't be there.
WOM
Reply #4 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:29 PM
Reply #4 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:29 PM
Thank you davad70. That answers my question. I have looked at many skins that the author updates and states that that there was a problem and this will correct it. Thats why I asked the question after seeing the initial high rating.
davad70
Reply #5 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:37 PM
Reply #5 Thursday, March 7, 2002 6:37 PM
Another thing to keep in mind is that the skin may not received that rating till after the update.
DavidK
Reply #6 Thursday, March 7, 2002 9:04 PM
Reply #6 Thursday, March 7, 2002 9:04 PM
also there is a lot of discussion about updates lately that makes the skinners more sensitive about listing all the fixes explicitly in the description so no one will think they didn't have a good reason to update it.
Most updates fix realatively minor things that are huge to the artist but probably not noticed by most users.
Most updates fix realatively minor things that are huge to the artist but probably not noticed by most users.
paxx
Reply #7 Thursday, March 7, 2002 10:08 PM
Reply #7 Thursday, March 7, 2002 10:08 PM
Keep in mind also WiseOldMan that ratings don't mean anything, so don't take them seriously. 
When you have 10 000 downloads but only 2 ratings, it really is meaningless. Even 5 ratings is meaningless, heck even 10 is meaningless when compared to the thousands of downloads it gets. So whatever the rating, it really is only the opinion of a few.
Also keep in mind that most people rate something when they feel something strong about it, either negative or positive. Very rarely will somebody try a skin and think, hey this is an average skin, let me go back and give it a 6. No, most of the time it's more like "Hey, this skin is awsome, I'll give it a 9 or a 10" or the opposite "This skin is totally horrible, let me make sure I go back to give it a 2 or 3".
In other words: disregard the ratings.
When you have 10 000 downloads but only 2 ratings, it really is meaningless. Even 5 ratings is meaningless, heck even 10 is meaningless when compared to the thousands of downloads it gets. So whatever the rating, it really is only the opinion of a few.
Also keep in mind that most people rate something when they feel something strong about it, either negative or positive. Very rarely will somebody try a skin and think, hey this is an average skin, let me go back and give it a 6. No, most of the time it's more like "Hey, this skin is awsome, I'll give it a 9 or a 10" or the opposite "This skin is totally horrible, let me make sure I go back to give it a 2 or 3".
In other words: disregard the ratings.
WOM
Reply #8 Thursday, March 7, 2002 10:18 PM
Reply #8 Thursday, March 7, 2002 10:18 PM
Thank you paxx. I was just trying to make sense out of chaos. I guess ratings are in the eyes of the rater. Pretty to one might not be to another.
craeonics
Reply #9 Friday, March 8, 2002 4:14 AM
Reply #9 Friday, March 8, 2002 4:14 AM
Paxx is right, as usual. Pay no attention to ratings. Judge by your own standards.
Ruthven
Reply #10 Friday, March 8, 2002 7:42 AM
Reply #10 Friday, March 8, 2002 7:42 AM
I have yet to see anyone defend the ratings system ... so why hasn't it been removed?
craeonics
Reply #12 Friday, March 8, 2002 8:45 AM
Reply #12 Friday, March 8, 2002 8:45 AM
No wait, I know, it was implemented as a method to save bandwidth. The idea was (and is) that in times of high bandwidth usage, non-members and lowerclass members will only see skins with a rating higher than X (don't know the exact number).
Ruthven
Reply #13 Friday, March 8, 2002 9:51 AM
Reply #13 Friday, March 8, 2002 9:51 AM
It's a rating higher higher than 2, I believe. But it seems that such a small percentage of skins have a rating of 1 or 2, that it's not worth it. And if the ratings system is as awful as everyone claims, then is the small bandwith savings worth the trouble?
Might a better method be only allow non-members and lowerclass members to see skins submitted within the last X days? Or with a minimum of X number of downloads?
Yeah, I know it'll probably never happen. And I get cranky since several of my skins have gotten what I believe are undeserved "preliminary" ratings, then end up with large numbers of downloads (but no one bothers to rate them). Then I see skins featured that steal elements of other people's skins and end up with hundreds of downloads simply because they're featured, while I still have several top-downloaded skins that have never been featured. Then I submit what seems to be a relevant news item (considering it's come up in skin comments several times) that seems to just get ignored. But I digress. And I'd better stop digressing before I end up exiled
Might a better method be only allow non-members and lowerclass members to see skins submitted within the last X days? Or with a minimum of X number of downloads?
Yeah, I know it'll probably never happen. And I get cranky since several of my skins have gotten what I believe are undeserved "preliminary" ratings, then end up with large numbers of downloads (but no one bothers to rate them). Then I see skins featured that steal elements of other people's skins and end up with hundreds of downloads simply because they're featured, while I still have several top-downloaded skins that have never been featured. Then I submit what seems to be a relevant news item (considering it's come up in skin comments several times) that seems to just get ignored. But I digress. And I'd better stop digressing before I end up exiled
starone
Reply #14 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:22 AM
Reply #14 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:22 AM
In the about section of WC, it says nonmembers and exiles can down load 7 and above.
Ruthven
Reply #15 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:33 AM
Reply #15 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:33 AM
Okay, I think it might've been standard members that got 2 and above, but the about section now says "any rating and above." Maybe that changed.
Of course, that about section isn't entirely accurate. It says you have to be a JourneyMan to rate skins, but I'm an Apprentice and can rate them as well.
Of course, that about section isn't entirely accurate. It says you have to be a JourneyMan to rate skins, but I'm an Apprentice and can rate them as well.
starone
Reply #16 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:44 AM
Reply #16 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:44 AM
Yes, and it implies that you have to be an apprentice or above to comment on skins. I see a lot of citizen comments. O well, I guess its just a guide.
DavidK
Reply #17 Friday, March 8, 2002 12:00 PM
Reply #17 Friday, March 8, 2002 12:00 PM
I think skins rated lower than 4 don't show up in the general list. Maybe that's just wallpapers though... Anyone should be able (if they're a member) to edit the visibility range in their user profile.
Jafo
Reply #18 Friday, March 8, 2002 7:27 PM
Reply #18 Friday, March 8, 2002 7:27 PM
In an ideal world, each and every submission would be of equal quality and/or standard....but it ain't an ideal world, so there needs to be a way to control/limit band-width demands. This is the raison d'etre for wallpaper moderations and skin 'rating'.
Now, by limiting those who have access to the 'rating' function to 'peers', or those who actually [hopefully] understand the ins and outs of skinning, you 'should' get a more 'informed' rating and/or comment, circumventing the 'wow, this ownz', and 'you sux0rz' type of dross that really helps no-one.
Now, egos being what they are, no 'ratings' will ever be universally accepted......pride gets hurt, toes are stood-upon....but take it in the spirit it is given - to simply maintain some semblance of control of what might ultimately have become an unmanageable monster.
More often than not, I've found that anything with a particularly high 'score' shows an equally high standard of polish/execution, and vise-versa....the same being said for those of 'lower' score and their 'quality'.
[note to self....ease off with the 'quotation marks']..
Anyway, as Paxx maintains, if you don't think much of the 'ratings', just ignore them...
Now, by limiting those who have access to the 'rating' function to 'peers', or those who actually [hopefully] understand the ins and outs of skinning, you 'should' get a more 'informed' rating and/or comment, circumventing the 'wow, this ownz', and 'you sux0rz' type of dross that really helps no-one.
Now, egos being what they are, no 'ratings' will ever be universally accepted......pride gets hurt, toes are stood-upon....but take it in the spirit it is given - to simply maintain some semblance of control of what might ultimately have become an unmanageable monster.
More often than not, I've found that anything with a particularly high 'score' shows an equally high standard of polish/execution, and vise-versa....the same being said for those of 'lower' score and their 'quality'.
[note to self....ease off with the 'quotation marks']..
Anyway, as Paxx maintains, if you don't think much of the 'ratings', just ignore them...
migellito
Reply #19 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:39 PM
Reply #19 Friday, March 8, 2002 10:39 PM
just to add to what jafo and davidk said, it also hopefully boosts the overall perceived quality of the material available on the site, especially to new users, thereby improving the user experience. it's like a first impression of a store or a pub or someplace. if you walk in and it looks like a dive, you're not likely to stick around and get to know the place. if you walk in and you're floored, you'll tend to stick around to get to know all the nooks and crannies that may not have been apparent at first.
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!
Reply #1 Thursday, March 7, 2002 5:28 PM