Home › Forums › General Chat › Variations on 4 dy
This topic contains 4 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by Anonymous 10 years, 5 months ago.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 7, 2013 at 10:33 #10150
when i rate the galleries & videos we get to peruse each day, the little explanation for 4 votes—-very good, want to see more like it, but something lacking that prevents a 5— is very apt
this isn’t the case for #3…it’s not often true that “i don’t have any real feelings” about the gallery… the feeling i have is “this is ok, just nothing special”
so, when i give out a 4, what is often the thing that’s lacking? just for me, the factor is often did the costume stay on, or at some point was it pulled aside? today’s archive gallery of the lovely Kelly Kole is a great example… that’s a wonderful harem costume but i had been on the set, somewhere in 150 photos i would have begged for the top to go… but in prior threads, you’ve explained that once a photo session is underway that isn’t always feasible, and i’ve come to accept that
today’s Sarah Louise gallery, though, is different… she’s nude from the start and my antenna goes up… the storyline is appealing… but as i scan thru the pictures i see that the way she
is holding her arms to guard her modesty isn’t going to thrill me… and by the last picture, i can see she has been successful… so much so that another 4 is in order 😈October 7, 2013 at 14:26 #16786It’s going to be a problem with any voting system that the same vote from different people may have different meanings. The thing that caused you give only 4 stars to a set might be the thing I really liked, and vice versa. And “three stars” might mean “I have conflicting feelings that cancel out – there’s something about this set I really like, and another thing I really hate” rather than the official “I didn’t see anything special about this set.”
It won’t be a perfect solution, but a proposal I’ve made before for a rating system is to give each set one to three “hearts” and one to three “hates.” E.g.
Good Parts
3 Hearts: The good parts were very good
2 Hearts: The good parts were just OK
1 Heart: The good parts were mostly not thereBad Parts
3 Hates: The bad parts were really bad
2 Hates: There were some bad parts
1 Hate: The bad parts were very minor or non-existantOn the other hand, changing the rating system is likely to be a big hassle, and so not worth the improvement.
October 15, 2013 at 15:16 #16787Feedback is important and I, too, try to vote on all the RE galleries I look at. Lurker is right that the same vote may mean different things from different people but I have to go further. In my own case it can mean different things from the same person. 🙄 I try to follow a rule that I if I say there is “something lacking” (4****) I can say what it is but sometimes it is very minor, like a couple of shots where I don’t like the lighting effect or a studio set where I think it should have a dark background rather than a white one (or the opposite – and I have searched in vain for a consistent principle to why I make those decisions!).
I also agree with Max about 3***. It is rare that “I don’t have any real feelings”. Far more often, I have lots of strong feelings but some are positive and some negative. So some votes get into the 4**** because after careful consideration the positives outweigh the negatives.
I can see potential benefits in a more sophisticated voting scheme such as Lurker suggests but (at least speaking from UK experience) voters are lazy and the more you ask them to think the more likely they are not to bother. Also, any change would make it difficult to compare data under the two systems and at least the current system means Hywel has a database against which to compare current votes. Experts have told me that in similar opinion surveys individual votes are meaningless and the only value is in comparisons over time and across different types of work.
I can’t help thinking how well the latest two Updates (“Kill Belle” of 14th October and “Yoko Tzury” of 15th October) illustrate how voting works. One set is from years ago: one up to date. One has a clothed model and another a nude. One features metal and the other rope. For me, both have many levels of interest but one is stronger on fantasy fun and the other on technical skill. At time of writing both have relatively poor marks, especially given that almost the only point they have in common is that Ariel is the model! For all their differences, I thought each in its own way deserved 5*****.
I retain my admiration for Hywel and Ariel that they make any sense of the voting at all. I hope one lesson is to keep up the variety of sets because we all get enough of the things we like to enjoy the site.
Andrew
October 15, 2013 at 18:26 #16788Any “improved” voting system is going to add at least a little bit of complexity, and at least some incompatability with the old system. That’s what I meant by a change being a big hassle.
A relatively simple change might be to rewrite the caption of the three-stars rating, to something like “I have either mixed or indifferent feelings about this set.”
October 15, 2013 at 19:24 #16789
AnonymousPersonally, I think five categories are fine, but I wish there was a way to also mention what one found limiting (or particularly strong) about a set…sort of an optional comments section. Yes, they would have to be logged in a special way, ideally one that could be browsed by others, but it seems to me they might help enormously in understanding exactly what was impinging the vote. I often feel frustrated when I vote — that what I am saying with my vote will be misunderstood.
-
AuthorPosts
The forum ‘General Chat’ is closed to new topics and replies.