December 18, 2007 at 11:29 am #354321
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
An Old OreMember
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
“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.
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
“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)
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?December 20, 2007 at 6:40 am #354931
Running for every single thing= no vote. from anyone.December 20, 2007 at 6:44 am #354932
What are the patron ratings going to be based on?
-LadonDecember 21, 2007 at 12:01 am #355147
Whatever they like (same categories if thats what you meant). The review panel ratings box will be there for people seeking more standardized reviews from more experienced reviewers. However, I don’t think letting patrons rate freely will damage ratings… the old directory had this and was relatively accurate. With separate review panel ratings I don’t think patrons will be as inclined to give movies bad ratings in order to “average things out” to get the movie the rating they want.December 21, 2007 at 9:41 am #355212
An Old OreMember
I asked Ladon this, but I neglected to ask you:
Do you have a plan or ideas to encourage / reward members for rating films?
As you stated, more ratings = greater accuracy, so encouraging members (specifically patrons) to rate films is fairly high on the agenda for the MoF Ratings.
(I’m asking harder questions of those running for Film Ratings since I’ll be working closely with that minister since our ministries are tied together.)December 21, 2007 at 6:53 pm #355336
I would ask to have a sticky thread in P&R that tells people how to rate movies and encourages people to rate movies.
Another idea I have been kicking around is giving patrons another rank based off the number of ratings. e.g. 50 ratings = bronze rater 100=silver rater 250= gold rater ect… Please let me know what you think of that because I am on the fence.
The topic ‘WINTER '07 – Brianfast for Minister of Film Rating’ is closed to new replies.