WINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Film Rating

HomeForumsGovernmental ForumsCampaignsWINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Film Rating

This topic has 1 voice, contains 22 replies, and was last updated by Avatar of Felix Felix 2555 days ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 23 total)
Author Posts
Author Posts
December 15, 2007 at 10:50 pm #353463
Avatar of brianfast
brianfast

Hello all, many of you will remember me for constantly criticizing and running against Ladon. This time around I have a 3 point plan to fix the film ratings. Ladon has had 2 terms to fix the system and he has failed each term.

- Stop searching for bad ratings from Patrons. They donated money to the site to rate movies how they like, not how the minister of film rating thinks they should. Why should people pay money to do work for the site?
- Create a separate ratings box for review panel ratings. This is the area where ratings should follow specific guidelines. Review panel members will also be able to have votes in the general public ratings box provided they are patrons. Everyone with patron privileges will be able to vote however they want in the general public ratings box.
- Get rid of the annoying javascript for patrons. It slows down the process and people already know how they will vote. Plus, not all browsers support javascript and some people have it disabled.

Now Schlaeps is requiring me to answer a few questions so here it goes:

Q:
What is your motivation for running for Minister of Discussion?
A:
I think the current ratings system is unfair to patrons
Q:
What experience do you have relating to my desired ministry?
A:
I am a patron so I can rate movies…

Feel free to ask questions

December 15, 2007 at 11:08 pm #353475
Avatar of LegosJedi
LegosJedi

Heh, that last question REALLY shows me why you should be elected.

Anyway, I actually like the idea of having the review panel be able to vote separately from the public. It gives us an idea of what the film is really like from people who know how to review well. Good idea, brian.

– LegosJedi — Building Better Resources Today, for Better Resources Tomorrow.
Candidate for Minister of Filming Resources

December 15, 2007 at 11:27 pm #353488
Avatar of RevMen
RevMen

Spamming my inbox = no vote.

December 15, 2007 at 11:33 pm #353493
Avatar of chosen1
chosen1

Ladon has done a great job so far at helping the system, it is not perfect, but it is better than last time. You blatantly saying he failed shows me that you are not properly researching the area in which you are running for.

And why is the current system unfair to patrons? On top of being a patron they get the privilege of being able to vote…doesn’t seem unfair to me. If they don’t want to vote, they don’t have to.

You do know that getting rid of that javascript code has to be approved by schlaeps and the other programmers, right? Have you even asked if it could be done before you made your promises?

December 15, 2007 at 11:45 pm #353499
Avatar of brianfast
brianfast

Patrons should be able to vote however they want. They shouldn’t need to vote with a predefined rubric as a guide.

Chosen1, you might value voices over background music. The rubric might tell you background music is more important. (just as an example)

Getting rid of the javascript is the last priority…

December 17, 2007 at 9:54 am #353995
Avatar of Ladon
Ladon

Create a separate ratings box for review panel ratings. This is the area where ratings should follow specific guidelines. Review panel members will also be able to have votes in the general public ratings box provided they are patrons. Everyone with patron privileges will be able to vote however they want in the general public ratings box.

Are you saying that you would prefer general Patron ratings to be less accurate?
From what I recall, the ratings system is meant to provide people with an accurate method of searching the directory for the best films, and an equally accurate method of knowing what the qualities of films are in comparison to others.
Without the guidelines of a rubric, how are those ratings meant to be accurate?

Patrons should be able to vote however they want. They shouldn’t need to vote with a predefined rubric as a guide.

Ah, so you would like Patrons to have a way to present their opinions, correct? The ratings system is not meant to be a method of opinion-taking. Opinions are meant for the Post and Review forum. Patrons already have banners over their avatars, so any review their post in the P&R forum will immediately get more attention than anyone else’s. If anyone thinks that the ratings system is a place to state their opinion, then they have been misinformed.

Ladon has had 2 terms to fix the system and he has failed each term.

That, sir, is mudslinging. I have improved the ratings system further each term, which is not considered to be a failure. If you wish to state an opinion about my ability as Minister, do so. However, any false accusations on your campaign will be interpreted immediately as mudslinging by most people, and will harm your chances of election.

But of course you know that :)

-Ladon

December 17, 2007 at 10:06 am #353997
Avatar of An Old Ore
An Old Ore

I’m kinda partial to the rubric simply on the basis that it gives everyone a general idea as to how the ratings will be interpreted.

Specific Example: If there is a film with no music, and the possible rating for music is a non-rubric 0 to 10, how would you resolve that?

A: Giving a rating of 5?
B: Giving a rating of 0?
C: Giving no rating? (Null value)
D: Other?

The current system allows a rater to confidently give a rating, knowing that they are not penalizing a film for not having a specific element. how would your system work?

December 17, 2007 at 1:04 pm #354011
Avatar of maggosh
maggosh

“RevMen” wrote: Spamming my inbox = no vote.

Too true. And bribeing me with moderatorship = no vote either.

December 18, 2007 at 12:13 am #354238
Avatar of brianfast
brianfast

All ratings are opinions. How can you say otherwise?


That, sir, is mudslinging. I have improved the ratings system further each term, which is not considered to be a failure. If you wish to state an opinion about my ability as Minister, do so. However, any false accusations on your campaign will be interpreted immediately as mudslinging by most people, and will harm your chances of election. “
What a crock. I cannot believe this. you accuse me of mudslinging (so you are doing the same thing) . You need to get a clue! I stated an opinion by saying that you have failed to fix the ratings system. That is not making false accusations. Who are you to tell me that the ratings system has not been considered a failure? You =/= or anyone other then yourself.

Ladon if you told all movies critics in the world to rate movies according to some stupid rubric nobody would follow it, it wouldn’t work. Its idiotic. Instead we have places like metacritic that average a bunch of different peoples ratings together to create good average ratings.

Ladon, if I asked you if you wanted to help plant trees in a national forest and I wanted to charge you 5 bucks for it what would you think? Why should people trying to give good ratings to help the directory have to pay?
Your thinking is flawed, there is no way around that.

December 18, 2007 at 7:58 am #354310
Avatar of Ladon
Ladon

My thinking is not flawed, it is simply that you may not be understanding what I am trying to do.

A critic is a reviewer. They are paid money to write their own opinion. A review is not a rating. A rating can be ATTACHED to a review, but the rating then becomes part of the review.

You would charge 5$ for getting a tree planted because that is what a seedling costs. Your price is not accurate, but it is not free to plant a tree.

“brianfast” wrote: All ratings are opinions. How can you say otherwise

Because they are not opinions. That is how ;)
A review is an opinion, a rating is describing what you saw. It has nothing to do with your opinions or values, but with the content of the film. A person should be able to look at the ratings and instantly be able to see what the different parts of the film have to offer. They should not have to worry about who rated it and how their opinions differed from the rest of the community. It is not about opinions, but about accurate descriptions.

What a crock. I cannot believe this. you accuse me of mudslinging (so you are doing the same thing) and then you. You need to get a clue! I stated an opinion by saying that you have failed to fix the ratings system. That is not making false accusations. Who are you to tell me that the ratings system has not been considered a failure? You =/= or anyone other then yourself.

Sir, calm down and breathe a little. I am not mudslinging. I am asking you questions about your campaign just like everyone else.
You have not explained how I ‘failed’ as Minister, and so it is currently a baseless accusation. ;)

I’m not going to argue definitions with you, I’m just going to ask you a few more questions and wish you good luck in your campaign.

1. How do you intend to improve the Ratings System?
2. What do you believe the main point of the Ratings System is, and how do you intend to achieve that?

Good luck with your campaign!

-Ladon

December 18, 2007 at 11:29 am #354321
Avatar of Schlaeps
Schlaeps

Plus, not all browsers support javascript and some people have it disabled.

I’ve made sure to make this (and mostly any javascript I write) cross-browser friendly.

In this particular case (as well as with the control panel) if you don’t have javascript enabled, nothing changes in terms of basic functionality.

December 18, 2007 at 6:01 pm #354375
Avatar of BertL
BertL

I like the “seperate ratings for review panel members” idea; I don’t like the “absolute freedom for ratings” idea.

December 18, 2007 at 9:27 pm #354435
Avatar of An Old Ore
An Old Ore

Q: How will your system ensure that ratings are meaningful?

Specifically, if a user glances at the ratings, will they be able to say “this film is better than that other film?”

December 20, 2007 at 1:58 am #354888
Avatar of brianfast
brianfast

“An Old Ore” wrote: Q: How will your system ensure that ratings are meaningful?

Specifically, if a user glances at the ratings, will they be able to say “this film is better than that other film?”

I will have seperate ratings for patron raters and review panel ratings. The review panel ratings will try to be more technically accurate while the patron ratings will probably be more “average fan” accurate.

For example, transformers has mixed reviews from “critics” but it seems like everyone thinks Transformers is an awesome movie and its a must watch.

I think it is important to get 2 perspectives. In fact, I think this system will be MORE accurate then Ladon’s system in a sense.

Also, despite previous examples of abuse in the brickfilms directory (probably by patrons) TCOTY still has favorable reviews. Things even out over time.

December 20, 2007 at 2:06 am #354890
Avatar of brianfast
brianfast

“An Old Ore” wrote: I’m kinda partial to the rubric simply on the basis that it gives everyone a general idea as to how the ratings will be interpreted.

Specific Example: If there is a film with no music, and the possible rating for music is a non-rubric 0 to 10, how would you resolve that?

A: Giving a rating of 5?
B: Giving a rating of 0?
C: Giving no rating? (Null value)
D: Other?

The current system allows a rater to confidently give a rating, knowing that they are not penalizing a film for not having a specific element. how would your system work?

Well, the review panel would still have a rubric of sorts, I probably would keep Ladon’s for continuity.

But for patrons I would probably add a line of text advising (rough, not good english) “if no elements of a component are present give a 0″. But at the same time if someone thinks that no music adds to the suspense then I would tolerate positive ratings. It is possible to have horrific music that gives headaches; why should such music get a higher rating then a movie that doesn’t give anything at all?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 23 total)

The topic ‘WINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Film Rating’ is closed to new replies.