At least it's official now, 3 = average!

[jiminski]

one of my very first ratings was just contested, i withdrew the awfully harsh '4.7' on grounds of friendship!

[detlef]

Wow, just looking at these poll results is disappointing. Looks like we all have some public education to do.

May I suggest hypnosis?

[wicked]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

[gdeangel]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

Yeah, that's my view basically, except that "3" being average, I would simply say, you start out with a net 0, i.e., 'average', i.e., "3", i.e., I'm not going to leave you feedback. So unless you impress or disappoint, don't expect feedback, especially since I don't want to look like a tool with 1 medal for 1v1 and the only other medal for brown nosing. And then, one caveat, if you go out of your way to leave me positive feedback, that'll be enough, in most cases, to warrant some reciprocal "positive" feedback.

I'm sure that's not the way people want it to work, but that seems fair to me and not going to bend any noses out of joint.

[PLAYER57832]

I have given several people all 5's because of long-standing game "relationships" with them.

But, the biggest problem isn't the 3 vs 5... the biggest problem is you now have no idea if someone is giving a "2" in attendance because the person deadbeat or because they refused to play "real time". Three versus 5 is basically "kudos".

[zimmah]

People who expect 5's for everything need to change their mindset. If you go play a normal game, play one turn a day, don't say a word in chat, ho-hum, you're done, don't expect 5's for everything. You're not getting rated LOWER when you get a 3, you're getting rated average, because let's face it, you were an average player in an average game. If you don't impress someone with your gameplay, or chat them up, or whatever, don't expect 4's and 5's. 5 IS NOT THE AVERAGE PEOPLE, 3 IS! Most of you are average, or it woudln't be called AVERAGE! lol Seriously, we need a mindset shift here. Don't automatically EXPECT a 4 or a 5. EXPECT A 3!

good luck telling them that, i tried for days and all i got is people flaming me, and i figured they won't listen to you either even though you're a mod. i guess they won't even listen to lack.

http://www.answers.com/topic/excellent

Dictionary:
excellent
(ĕk'sə-lənt) pronunciation

adj.

1. Of the highest or finest quality; exceptionally good of its kind.
2. Archaic. Superior.

[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin excellēns, excellent-, present participle of excellere, to excel. See excel.]
excellently ex'cel·lent·ly adv.

that's what a 5 star rating is.

and this is what a 3 star rating is

Thesaurus: average

adjective

1. Of moderately good quality but less than excellent: acceptable, adequate, all right, common, decent, fair, fairish, goodish, moderate, passable, respectable, satisfactory, sufficient, tolerable. Informal OK, tidy. See good/bad.
2. Commonly encountered: common, commonplace, general, normal, ordinary, typical, usual. See surprise/expect.
3. Being of no special quality or type: common, commonplace, cut-and-dried, formulaic, garden, garden-variety, indifferent, mediocre, ordinary, plain, routine, run-of-the-mill, standard, stock, undistinguished, unexceptional, unremarkable. See good/bad, usual/unusual.

now you see why you shouldn't rate everyone a 5?

[zimmah]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

that's excactly how i do it. from the very beginning even before it was 'official' but people think i'm crazy

well good news: before it was common knowledge the world wasn't flat, everyone who thought otherwise was considered crazy, so maybe i'm not the one being crazy here

[detlef]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

that's excactly how i do it. from the very beginning even before it was 'official' but people think i'm crazy

well good news: before it was common knowledge the world wasn't flat, everyone who thought otherwise was considered crazy, so maybe i'm not the one being crazy here

Understand that plenty of us just think you're crazy because you're doing things like starting "known abusers" threads and what not. I agree that, in theory 3 should be the default. It's just that I also realize that people aren't going to go for it.

So, go ahead and play the genius martyr card if you want. Oh, by the way, you know one definition of crazy? It's doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Well, you keep posting the same thing over and over and somehow expect everyone will agree with you all of a sudden.

Oh, also, what exactly is your point. You seem to hate the new system and, again, I completely understand why. So, why have you made your self the official ratings police? Why are you policing a system that you think is useless?

[FabledIntegral]

Posting something over and over again to convince people to change within the beginning of the implementation of something is not crazy. Because it's just arrived, there is lots of controversy and debate concerning the topic, therefore it's legitimate, or at least that's how I perceive it.

[detlef]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

So, I can gather that making alliances will lose me points? I didn't realize that alliances were against the rules.

So, in summary, that's now two completely legal things that can get you a low feedback rating in the eyes of some:

Using your entire 24 hours to take your turn or making an alliance in a game. You guys are right, this thing is clearing up already. Just had to give it some time. Soon, it's gonna be crystal.

[zimmah]

So, go ahead and play the genius martyr card if you want. Oh, by the way, you know one definition of crazy? It's doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

like throwing a dice?

[zimmah]

Oh, also, what exactly is your point. You seem to hate the new system and, again, I completely understand why. So, why have you made your self the official ratings police? Why are you policing a system that you think is useless?

the system wasn't useless by defealt, it's the (ab)users that make it useless.

[zimmah]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

So, I can gather that making alliances will lose me points? I didn't realize that alliances were against the rules.
.

i think she ment unannounced ones.

[detlef]

Oh, also, what exactly is your point. You seem to hate the new system and, again, I completely understand why. So, why have you made your self the official ratings police? Why are you policing a system that you think is useless?

the system wasn't useless by defealt, it's the (ab)users that make it useless.

You must be German. Never fault the system, always the user. Well, guess what, if your system requires everyone to defy their own nature, it's not a very good system. The road to failure is paved with "great systems" that "people were too stupid to understand".

[gloryordeath]

Oh, also, what exactly is your point. You seem to hate the new system and, again, I completely understand why. So, why have you made your self the official ratings police? Why are you policing a system that you think is useless?

the system wasn't useless by defealt, it's the (ab)users that make it useless.

You must be German. Never fault the system, always the user. Well, guess what, if your system requires everyone to defy their own nature, it's not a very good system. The road to failure is paved with "great systems" that "people were too stupid to understand".

Can we get a ding for the man?

[PLAYER57832]

Oh, also, what exactly is your point. You seem to hate the new system and, again, I completely understand why. So, why have you made your self the official ratings police? Why are you policing a system that you think is useless?

the system wasn't useless by defealt, it's the (ab)users that make it useless.

No, its the fact that there is honest disagreement over how folks should play.
As well as honest disagreement over how to rate people.

[Robinette]

I think i can see why many people are having a hard time with this new 1 to 5 thing...

The Old system had 3 choices: Negative, Neutral, Positive

And the majority of feedback given and received with the old system was Positive, which seems to translate to a 5 when overlaid with this new system.

So it's gonna be really tough for many people to leave 3's as it feels like the old Neutral... so ask yourself, how many times did you give or receive Neutral Feedback with the old system?

[detlef]

I think i can see why many people are having a hard time with this new 1 to 5 thing...

The Old system had 3 choices: Negative, Neutral, Positive

And the majority of feedback given and received with the old system was Positive, which seems to translate to a 5 when overlaid with this new system.

So it's gonna be really tough for many people to leave 3's as it feels like the old Neutral... so ask yourself, how many times did you give or receive Neutral Feedback with the old system?

Well, that and the fact that neutrals were typically seen as things you sent when you weren't happy with their play but not so bad that you sent a negative. So, it's basically positive, sort of negative, and negative. So, translating that to the new system, 1s and 2s will be negs, 3s will be sort of negative, 4s will be OK I guess, and 5s will be positive. We're at least 1000 more threads worth of browbeating away from changing that mind set.

Again, back to the system. Any system worth a damn, needs to be somewhat intuitive. The very fact that wicked and co. are pledging to post 100s of times to change our mindset on this pretty much shows that this is not, remotely intuitive. Well, that and the fact that I completely agree that 3 should be the norm and yet my first thought when I saw somebody with a 3.7 was, "hmm, what's wrong with that guy?" You can't escape your nature.

[Bones2484]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

So, I can gather that making alliances will lose me points? I didn't realize that alliances were against the rules.
.

i think she ment unannounced ones.

I dont think so... many people are very much against any type of alliance in FFA games.

[detlef]

Well I just went back and re-rated everyone I could and withdrew a few as well. For me, you start the game with a 3. If you do nothing to impress me you'll stay there. If you do nothing to disappoint me (like alliances), you'll stay there. Simple, eh?

So, I can gather that making alliances will lose me points? I didn't realize that alliances were against the rules.
.

i think she ment unannounced ones.

I dont think so... many people are very much against any type of alliance in FFA games.

Well great, yet another BS and completely inconsistent manner in which the ratings will be used. So, like I said, failing to meet some arbitrary time limit and making completely legal alliances on the board can get you a bad rating. This is shaping up nicely.

[zimmah]

Oh, also, what exactly is your point. You seem to hate the new system and, again, I completely understand why. So, why have you made your self the official ratings police? Why are you policing a system that you think is useless?

the system wasn't useless by defealt, it's the (ab)users that make it useless.

You must be German. Never fault the system, always the user. Well, guess what, if your system requires everyone to defy their own nature, it's not a very good system. The road to failure is paved with "great systems" that "people were too stupid to understand".

i'm dutch, not german, and it's pretty much an insult to call me a german

[zimmah]

Well, that and the fact that neutrals were typically seen as things you sent when you weren't happy with their play but not so bad that you sent a negative. So, it's basically positive, sort of negative, and negative. So, translating that to the new system, 1s and 2s will be negs, 3s will be sort of negative, 4s will be OK I guess, and 5s will be positive. We're at least 1000 more threads worth of browbeating away from changing that mind set.

that's indeed how most people see it. however i don't think in fact it's the right translation. since actually 3's aren't ment to be negative. though most people might still see it that way.

[zimmah]

Well, that and the fact that I completely agree that 3 should be the norm and yet my first thought when I saw somebody with a 3.7 was, "hmm, what's wrong with that guy?" You can't escape your nature.

true, but that's because he's now standing out between all the 4.5+'s if everyone has a 3.0, then you'd think different about it.

[hulmey]

im not even gonna both rating people that i dont think played well, acted well and such! if they done the opposite well i'll rate them that way as well

[owenshooter]

im not even gonna both rating people that i dont think played well, acted well and such! if they done the opposite well i'll rate them that way as well

oh, you mean kind of like how you used to leave feedback? yeah, me too... good game, FIVES across the board!!! nothing spectacular and a bit of a bad player, NO COMMENT... total jackass? a 2... that is how i feel... that is how i am going to openly abuse the system. you know, by rating people according to my interpretation of the new system...-0

p.s.-if they kick ass, a comment on their wall!!!