What does Yas Forums consider to be an "Ok" rating on the 5-star scale? What would be a good/bad rating? When should an album be rated 5 stars?
I'm asking this because I'm new to rym and I feel like my ratings are affected by thinking that 4 stars = 70/100 = Average score. Help me rate stuff better Yas Forums.
rate stuff in binary.
>me likey
>me no likey
It's up to you. I use a logarithmic scale, which means the difference between 4 and 5 stars is very little but the difference between 1 and 2 stars is very big. It lets me rank the albums I like more precisely, a 1.5 star is "ok" for me.
2.5 is ok
Great = 5
good = 4.5
Ok = 4
Meh = 3.5
Bad = 3
Awful = 2.5
>4 stars = 70/100
What? Are you retarded?
4 Stars / 5 Stars = 4/5 = 8/10 = 80/100
The most average rating is 2.5 stars = 50/100
4 stars is a very good score, 3.5 (70/100) is also good.
This is a pretty accurate description of what I've been using, but I feel like there's too much of the scale I'm not using. However, I also may just be listening to albums that I have a predisposition to liking, making my scoring higher than average.
For me it's
0 = Mediocre
0.5 = Competent
1 = Ok
1.5 = Average
2 = Good
2.5 = Very Good
3 = Very Very Good
3.5 = Great
4 = Very Great
4.5 = Fantastic
5 = Incredible
I have never seen a more retarded rating system, holy shit
>taking the obvious bait
4 stars is 80% (if your rating is supposed to mean overall quality compared to every other piece of music) which statistically means it should be better than 80% of what you review. Therefore, statistically you could only hand out 4/5 20% of the time. Of course where it falls apart is the statistics don't represent the reality of the situation and you could never give a perfect score because quality wise it would have to be 'better' than everything else you've reviewed. You just have to 'feel it out' which is bs.
What's wrong with it? I don't bother rating or reviewing music I strongly dislike. Saves me time.
0 = Completely terrible
0.5 = awful
1 = pretty bad
1.5 = bad
2 = poor, not that good
2.5 = mediocre
3 = good
3.5 = very good
4 = awesome
4.5 = masterpiece
5 = perfection
agreed with this one
>1.5 = Average
And that's why user ratings are useless
Depends on what scale you rate.
Rym might use a std dev for their displayed ratings.
1 very bad
2 bad
3 ok
4 good
5 very good
>rating music with numbers
I rate this post 1\5 a little bait a little cringe but ultimately lacks substance and the pepe image doesn't add any quality to it.
yikes
0.5 bad
.
.
.
5.0 good
0.5 - Awful/Terrible
1 - Bad
1.5 - Poor
2.0 - Below Average
2.5 - Average
3.0 - Decent
3.5 - Good
4.0 - Excellent
4.5 - Near Perfection
5.0 - Personal Favorite/Perfect
For my own internal library:
0 - unrated (this is the default iTunes star rating)
1 - garbage, delete
2 - can't decide if I keep or delete, next time I hear it I have to set to 1 or 3
3 - good song, keep it (at around 10k songs)
4 - great song (2k-3k songs)
5 - amazing song (500 songs, give or take)
Also this Siri shorcut is very convenient
fpbp
>songs, not albums
yuck.
its not fucking rocket science
2.5 = average
the rest you can figure out yourself, no?
fuk u that's how i live my life
2.5/5 is avg
3.5 and above is “good”
5 should only be given to albums that you enjoy the whole way through with no “bad” songs
There's a difference between rating and reviewing user
I rate music this way as well.