I have thought about the profile stuff a bit as well. I am going to include this in the rewrite of the new forum software along with a few other cool features.
[Link]
Chain Of Command (Brazzers) - review by fu_q| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| Saki At-Large 2087 Posts 11/99 |  Posted - Jan 9 2000 : 11:08PMI'm just following up on my promise to give some suggestions on how to improve the review ratings system. Here are some ideas--feedback is appreciated. 1. Add Reviewer Profiles. It would be great to have a self profile of each reviewer (similar to the UBB but specific to reviews). Fields could include a free-response introduction, likes and dislikes sections, and recommended titles. This would give readers a little background to put the reviews in context (for example, if I were to dislike movies without plots, it might explain why I gave a low grade to a gonzo flick). Profiles could either be made available through a link on the review or in a sidebar table. 2. In addition to the existing rating categories (overall, looks, extras, A/V quality, and plot), add "sex" and "value". Sex would refer to the erotic heat of the DVD in general, while value would assess the "bang for the buck." 3. Provide definitions for the categories. This will help reviewers provide more accurate ratings. For example, "Value: How much "bang for the buck" does this DVD have overall? Do the extra features, sex content, length, and all other elements add up to a great value for the price (5-Excellent) or is the DVD not worth buying or renting? (1-Poor) Or is the value the same as similar titles on the market? (3-Average)" 4. Provide a standard scale and common reference as to what the values mean. In other words, for all categories, 1 = poor, 2=below average, 3=average, 4=above average, 5=excellent. For the plot category, there should also be a N/A (instead of 0), since most gonzos and compilations don't have a plot or acting to speak of. 5. Present the ratings in a visually appealing format. This allows a quick "at a glance" summary for the reader. Other sites use stars, but other ideas include a graduated bar graph or even "4/5" or "Above Average." I think these suggestions will improve the usefulness of reviews without making people jump through hoops to write reviews. Unfortunately, it would require some work on the systems end to get them implemented (sorry, Drew Black)  What do you folks think? Saki ------------------ [url=455144]My Adult DVD List (Updated 1/6/00) | [url=465501]My Adult DVD Reviews [This message has been edited by Saki (edited January 09, 2000).] [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 |  Posted - Jan 9 2000 : 11:33PMI have thought about the profile stuff a bit as well. I am going to include this in the rewrite of the new forum software along with a few other cool features. [Link] |
| Saki At-Large 2087 Posts 11/99 | Posted - Jan 9 2000 : 11:51PM Also, I personally think that doubling the range of possibilities tends to favor the high side of the scale over the low. For example, at [url=380479]IMDB</A, out of the over 100 movies I've rated, I've got quite a few 10s, 9s, 8s, and 7s but very few under 5. I think the lowest I've rated a movie is 3 (Striptease). That's because to me a "1" means "THE WORST MOVIE EVER," something that I would stand up, boo, and walk out of. But that's what I perceive a '1' as. By looking at the ratings statistics, it looks like some people are pretty free with the 1's and 10's and completely ignore the granularity. To them, 1=didn't like it, 5=okay, and 10=liked it. So I guess I'm okay with adding .5 or making it a 10 point scale, so long as there's a model given to explain what the graduations mean. Otherwise the granularity won't make much of a difference since each person will define it differently. Saki ------------------ [url=455144]My Adult DVD List</A (Updated 1/6/00) | [url=465501]My Adult DVD Reviews</A [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |