[09-Jun-2008] Ratings & Medals

[jiminski]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but the current ratings don't round up. So if one person gives you a 4 in any category just once you can never have that 5.0 rating again. Is there any way around this, or will 4.9 eventually just be the best anyone can conceivably hold?

Not true: View jiminski's ratings

I don't understand what you were directing me to. He had all 4.9s which is what i'm saying doesn't round to 5. I saw somewhere else since that it can round back up to 5.0, so my concern is unfounded/resoved, but not in those ratings

yeah i think the point fFraid was making is that it was 5 (it moved to 4.9 after that post today.) although in some places i had scored less than 5 in individual ratings?

[Bones2484]

I was just given a 1 (along with everyone else in the game) in Fair Play by a player who felt "cheated by the system" in an escalating game.

I messaged him to ask about it and he said "not blaming you but the CC site it's self you got good points that game be happy with that. and i had had the upper half of the board and you just walked through everyone? should have been a little more of a fight in my mind."

Which was rather humorous especially considering I didn't win the game. Clearly this tool has no idea how escalating works.

Just wanted to post it here for more "proof" that the rating system is horribly flawed.

edit: After further conversations with this player, he seems to be of the opinion that if he lose, the game is rigged and thus the game (not the player) did not give him a Fair Play. So if he loses, he rates a 1. If he wins, he rates a 5. kind of pathetic, but just the thing to expect from this system.

[tomtorresson]

I keep getting emails from folks complaining about ratings I leave them. Is what I have been doing not correct?

. They way I understand it, 3 stars is "average". The way I have been rating folks is that when a game is super fast I give 5/5 stars for attendance. No missed turns is 4/5. 1 Missed turn is 3/5. Many is 2/5. Kicked out is 1/5.

For Fair Play I basically just give everyone 4 or 5....not even sure why they have this category as if you cheat it gets reported and corrected.

For Attitude - the most friendly people (in chat) get a 4 or 5. Just a normal "GL" or "GG" gets a 3 (Average). No chat at all gets a 2 and if someone is a jerk I give them a 1.

[Ffraid]

I don't understand what you were directing me to. He had all 4.9s which is what i'm saying doesn't round to 5. I saw somewhere else since that it can round back up to 5.0, so my concern is unfounded/resoved, but not in those ratings

yeah i think the point fFraid was making is that it was 5 (it moved to 4.9 after that post today.) although in some places i had scored less than 5 in individual ratings?

Yes! Sorry about the confusion jaguars34. I was directing you to jiminski's ratings because, up until this morning, he had a 5.0 average even though he had received 7 4s and even a 3 (Damn you, jiminski, for getting all those 1s and totally screwing up my illustrating point. Very inconsiderate. Now I understand why the guy gave you all 1s. ). I've never met/played jiminski but he's very active in these forums about the new ratings system that I've been reading, so I had checked out his profile and had noticed the very thing about which you had posted. I don't know, offhand, about anyone else to use as an example, but you say that you have seen proof elsewhere since, so I guess it's irrelevant.

[cre8tiff]

I find it difficult to believe the admins get less complaints about the new system and it's abuses/flaws, than they got for negative feedback. It seems an ego thing to me.

[jiminski]

I find it difficult to believe the admins get less complaints about the new system and it's abuses/flaws, than they got for negative feedback. It seems an ego thing to me.

i am sure they get more complaints ... but i doubt it is an ego thing (maybe a tincey bit) the thing is they do not have to do anything about it any longer (the whole object of the update); they can file all feedback complaints under 'H' for 'he-he, he-he-he'

[cre8tiff]

Exactly. So why not just re-establish the old system without the ability to complain/overturn bad feedback? Seems like a no-brainer to me. But of course, I've been saying that all along.

[jiminski]

Exactly. So why not just re-establish the old system without the ability to complain/overturn bad feedback? Seems like a no-brainer to me. But of course, I've been saying that all along.

well i understand why they will not do un-mod'ed, bespoke feedback ... the game can get pretty heated and nasty as we know. Feedback is often the expression of emotion and interpersonal ire.

I had put together a nice alternative option for moderated feedback but people who care enough about Comment based feedback to actually get involved, are very much in the minority.. Trust me, i gave it a bloody good shot and lobbied all over for support!

[suggs]

A month gone by and it still sux. Thanks for listening.

They won't listen. I don't think they understand they are running a business now, as opposed to having a laugh on the web with their mates.
CC is going down hill.

[k8theriver]

i don't like the rating system because people give poor ratings with no explanation. for example, in one game i started the conversation by saying, "gl" no one else said anything. that was it. but then my opponent gave me 3 stars for attitude. 3 stars for everything, actually. i didn't miss a turn and if i played unfairly it was in vain because i didn't win.
i do like the medals though. that's fun.

[lt.pie]

i don't like the rating system because people give poor ratings with no explanation. for example, in one game i started the conversation by saying, "gl" no one else said anything. that was it. but then my opponent gave me 3 stars for attitude. 3 stars for everything, actually. i didn't miss a turn and if i played unfairly it was in vain because i didn't win.
i do like the medals though. that's fun.

3 is average so don't worry about it.

[DukeToshiro]

3 is average so don't worry about it.

Not in this ratings system. It's very obvious that 5 is average because that's the "average" rating left by everyone. Anyone with a single ounce of intelligence can see that since everyone is used to the positive/neutral/negative system, they are using the following system....5=positive, 3= neutral, 1=negative. The only reason to give someone a neutral under the old system was so that you could comment on his feedback without actually hurting it. Now, people don't have any reason to leave a "neutral". Just another reason why this thing is a pointless waste of space.

[jangler3]

I don't know if this has been brought up, but I need to be able to put a comment under the ratings from others. I got a 3 from a player on attendance. I didn't miss. I don't miss!It is the only rating that is not subjective. And I think it would be good to be able to respond to ratings like this. I this in the works? And if not,.... WHY?

[max is gr8]

I was told by a player that because I played after he had finished in a freestyle game (because I had 2 ongoing freestyle rts) I would be getting all ones, this is obvious abuse of the system, in return I gave him all ones, he sucked the fun out of that game, and it will be hard to tell whether the feedback given from him is true, the feedback given from me will suffer the same scrutiny. It does not work as a system. If anything allow comments but not positive or negative feedback, no ratings but If a player is interested in another players performance he can read those

[kiwie]

what about when a player deadbeats on u ,u give him bad rating then he does the same to u when its no fault of urs,better to give no rating at all in that case,that mean its not a great system doesn't show true ratings

[kiwie]

sounds like everyone has the same comment might be time for the trail rating system to be over.IT DOESN'T WORK ITS NOT A FAIR RATING
yes i had 3"s for a great game that just drops u down as well [url][/url]

[xeno]

If anything allow comments but not positive or negative feedback, no ratings but If a player is interested in another players performance he can read those

Isn't that what the wall is for?

[jangler3]

If anything allow comments but not positive or negative feedback, no ratings but If a player is interested in another players performance he can read those

Isn't that what the wall is for?

Not really. Because you can delete what you don't like. I told one player, learn how to play assassin. And she deleted it. So I put it back with a row of"!!!!" and she deleted that and put me on her foe list. Hilarious!!!!!!

[xeno]

If I only rate a player's attendance, does it count as a rating towards the medal?

[happy2seeyou]

If I only rate a player's attendance, does it count as a rating towards the medal?

yeah. A rating is a rating

[AAFitz]

I feel that some players are behaving worse now that there is no written feedback to worry about.
Lack has stated that there was alot of unjustified neg. feedbacks left and that the mods had to deal with it.

I am sorry i dont feel sorry for someone doing there job.

I wouldnt want to clean the porta johns but someone has to do it, and if they take the job then they should do the job the best they can without complaining about it.

what about all the truely justifiable negative feedbacks that were left, verified by the game logs and game chat? Besides acting as a written warning to others it was also a form of therapy, a release of sorts for having to deal with these morons.

Conquer Club gets 1 star for its handling of this fiasco.

i have to say i think it enables people to behave worse too..

heheh i threatened to suicide into a player (joking i must add) if they once more corrected my gamechat speeling (it's a spelling joke .. that kills em in Missouri!)

And i thought to myself.. hmm really what is to stop people who get really peed-off from doing just that? a rating of a 1?.. which will be swallowed in another 30, average behaviour, 5 star rating games!?

hmm well I realise that human nature 'should' be better but sometimes, without the fear of a meaningful punishment, it lapses!
I am only realising now that negs, accompanied by a relevant comment to justify it, did actually offer a meaningful and lasting punishment.

Yes, I absolutely love the new system because it does all the things I spent a thousand words warning that it would do.

I spent as much energy on the other feedback system as I did the game. It takes alot of work to play thousands of games like this, and not get too many complaints. Now I dont worry half as much as I did before, and consider it a relief.

I dont think its a better system in any way, because it is nearly useless information, but it has been much more fun for me.

The main problem with the old system was that the moderation took a lot of time, and was completely subjective, but you didnt have to worry about negatives that werent accurate, because they were written out, and attached to games... it was easy to read and figure out who really was the trouble maker... now.. that info is all gone... I dont even know what the ratings mean, but I do like my 5.0

[jiminski]

I feel that some players are behaving worse now that there is no written feedback to worry about.
Lack has stated that there was alot of unjustified neg. feedbacks left and that the mods had to deal with it.

I am sorry i dont feel sorry for someone doing there job.

I wouldnt want to clean the porta johns but someone has to do it, and if they take the job then they should do the job the best they can without complaining about it.

what about all the truely justifiable negative feedbacks that were left, verified by the game logs and game chat? Besides acting as a written warning to others it was also a form of therapy, a release of sorts for having to deal with these morons.

Conquer Club gets 1 star for its handling of this fiasco.

i have to say i think it enables people to behave worse too..

heheh i threatened to suicide into a player (joking i must add) if they once more corrected my gamechat speeling (it's a spelling joke .. that kills em in Missouri!)

And i thought to myself.. hmm really what is to stop people who get really peed-off from doing just that? a rating of a 1?.. which will be swallowed in another 30, average behaviour, 5 star rating games!?

hmm well I realise that human nature 'should' be better but sometimes, without the fear of a meaningful punishment, it lapses!
I am only realising now that negs, accompanied by a relevant comment to justify it, did actually offer a meaningful and lasting punishment.

Yes, I absolutely love the new system because it does all the things I spent a thousand words warning that it would do.

I spent as much energy on the other feedback system as I did the game. It takes alot of work to play thousands of games like this, and not get too many complaints. Now I dont worry half as much as I did before, and consider it a relief.

I dont think its a better system in any way, because it is nearly useless information, but it has been much more fun for me.

The main problem with the old system was that the moderation took a lot of time, and was completely subjective, but you didnt have to worry about negatives that werent accurate, because they were written out, and attached to games... it was easy to read and figure out who really was the trouble maker... now.. that info is all gone... I dont even know what the ratings mean, but I do like my 5.0

heheh a reformed multi bought his way back in and gave me all 1's... making me a 4.9.
the system is sadly worthless and i do not use it... did you see my community feedback idea Fitzy?

community moderated feedback

[hulmey]

I feel that some players are behaving worse now that there is no written feedback to worry about.
Lack has stated that there was alot of unjustified neg. feedbacks left and that the mods had to deal with it.

I am sorry i dont feel sorry for someone doing there job.

I wouldnt want to clean the porta johns but someone has to do it, and if they take the job then they should do the job the best they can without complaining about it.

what about all the truely justifiable negative feedbacks that were left, verified by the game logs and game chat? Besides acting as a written warning to others it was also a form of therapy, a release of sorts for having to deal with these morons.

Conquer Club gets 1 star for its handling of this fiasco.

i have to say i think it enables people to behave worse too..

heheh i threatened to suicide into a player (joking i must add) if they once more corrected my gamechat speeling (it's a spelling joke .. that kills em in Missouri!)

And i thought to myself.. hmm really what is to stop people who get really peed-off from doing just that? a rating of a 1?.. which will be swallowed in another 30, average behaviour, 5 star rating games!?

hmm well I realise that human nature 'should' be better but sometimes, without the fear of a meaningful punishment, it lapses!
I am only realising now that negs, accompanied by a relevant comment to justify it, did actually offer a meaningful and lasting punishment.

Yes, I absolutely love the new system because it does all the things I spent a thousand words warning that it would do.

I spent as much energy on the other feedback system as I did the game. It takes alot of work to play thousands of games like this, and not get too many complaints. Now I dont worry half as much as I did before, and consider it a relief.

I dont think its a better system in any way, because it is nearly useless information, but it has been much more fun for me.

The main problem with the old system was that the moderation took a lot of time, and was completely subjective, but you didnt have to worry about negatives that werent accurate, because they were written out, and attached to games... it was easy to read and figure out who really was the trouble maker... now.. that info is all gone... I dont even know what the ratings mean, but I do like my 5.0

worry about negatives!!! i only had 1 in 2 years and i had the odd outburst now and again!

[KoE_Sirius]

Get rid of the stars system.Its complete rubbish.Its only open to someone opinion and I'm not interested.Lets let our rank or win ratio decide this.
The medal system is fantastic tho.