you probably misunderstood how the rating system works

[Nymeria Stark]

i just realised it's possible to have a 5 in every field yet a 1,7 overall.

Nymeria, next time you play xtratabasco just agree with him when he talks about his conspiracy theories and he will give you 5's across the board.

he's the most irrational person i have come across on cc so far so i'm not surprised hes big on conspiracy theories.

[niMic]

If no rating really does mean 0/5 instead of, you know, no rating, then it's both misnamed and poorly designed.

Also, there's this:

You can leave any attribute without a rating if you don't have an opinion.

[degaston]

No, a zero star rating does not affect your overall average. Otherwise this guy would have an overall rating of 1 instead of 3. Nor does it affect the attribute ratings, or he would have a 0 for those instead of n/a.

[Extreme Ways]

No, a zero star rating does not affect your overall average. Otherwise this guy would have an overall rating of 1 instead of 3. Nor does it affect the attribute ratings, or he would have a 0 for those instead of n/a.

krod1984 for reference.

[Nymeria Stark]

so the ratings are rounded incorrectly...?

[degaston]

so the ratings are rounded incorrectly...?

What is this in reference to?

[Metsfanmax]

No, a zero star rating does not affect your overall average. Otherwise this guy would have an overall rating of 1 instead of 3. Nor does it affect the attribute ratings, or he would have a 0 for those instead of n/a.

But it does affect your overall average, compared to how people often expect the system to work. If I rate someone a one-star on one category and leave the other ratings blank, I'm effectively giving that person a one-star rating in the overall category. (As you're basically pointing out with krod.) As we've discussed before, the overall rating is an average-of-averages, rather than an average of the sum of all individual ratings. Consequently, if I give someone a one star in one category and not the others, they will have a lower overall rating than if the ratings system were set up so that it only averaged ratings that were actually given.

Nymeria was originally confused because they have 71 3x5 star ratings, one 2x5 star rating, and one 1x1 star rating. Nymeria presumably thought that their rating should be the average of these 216 individual ratings, which would be 4.98. But Nymeria's actual rating is the result of averaging 72x5.0 and 1x1.0, yielding an overall rating of 4.945 which averages down to 4.9.

It is true that, in the ratings system we do have, giving someone a 1 star in one category is the same as giving them a 1 star in every category from the perspective of overall ratings.

[Nymeria Stark]

so the ratings are rounded incorrectly...?

What is this in reference to?

this post in suggestions

This is only a tiny issue, but it should also be very simple to resolve. I'm only really posting it because I should be studying and am a master procrastinator.

The ratings are currently rounded down in cases when they should be rounded up.

My ratings:
Attitude: 71x5
Gameplay: 72x5
Fair Play: 72x5, 1x1

Overall:
(71+72+72)x5+1=1076
1076/216=4.98184...

One does not simply round 4.98 down to 4.9.

to which a mod replied that the 0s are calculated in.

[niMic]

That's... really dumb. Seems trivial to fix.

[judge_reinhold]

you always give X/15. leaving a field blank when rating someone gives them a 0. if you rate someone 5/0/0 because you liked one aspect and don't have enough info to rate the rest, you are not giving them 5/5. you are giving them 5/15, worse than if you rated 2/2/2.

so stop giving decent people 5/5/0 and start giving cunts 1/0/0 rather than 1/1/1.

No. 0's don't count. 0 is unrated. If you don't rate someone at all, do they get 0/0/0 = 0.00?

If 0's did count, then I would have hurt a lot of people's ratings! LOL!
https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... e_reinhold

Only ratings from 1 to 5 count. 0 is unrated. It is known.