Proper Rating Etiquette

I could pick lines and put together a case like that too. It is pointless to result to this bickering about. Yes, this is pointless now, you're salty because I refuse to argue on false pretenses. All I did was introduce an idea, I wanted to elaborate, but I decided against it when you made your false analogy. All I've said is in the previous posts if anyone else wants to read it, but I doubt that now that the flamewar is in full swing.

 

I still don't see why players should be able to rate mods at all.

The main argument in favor of ratings is the ability to draw comparisons between mods. Well... This is not an e-commerce website, you are not picking one over the other based on reviews and ratings because the uninformed choice of an inferior product would equal wasting your hard-earned money. Plus, do you really need to know a classic JDM car mod is rated higher than, say, a futuristic racing track, in turn rated higher than a now unsupported school bus? As long as we only have categories at large, ratings are pointless.

As it is, the rating system is abusable (and abused), it can't really be used for reasoned comparisons (let's be fair, most forum members couldn't review a mod properly if their life depended) so it's pretty much redundant.

Reviews without ratings (maybe just recommendations) would serve the purpose much better.

 

That last line is interesting, I mean overall it could work, but then something still bothers me about it: On what basis are people going to flock to the "good mods"? Doesn't removing the ratings result in more mess?

 

Why are people supposed to flock to "good mods" in the first place?

I thought people were choosing mods they were interested in playing and then judge whether the mod they downloaded is worth keeping or not, not just the highest-rated ones...

 

Aaaand that makes ten times you've attempted to shut me down and call me pointless.

You criticize me for cherry-picking your quotes, but you still haven't come up with a rebuttal to my argument that goes further than calling my failing grade analogy "false." Not wanting to elaborate is one thing, but using my analogy as a bad excuse to shift the blame to me is another. If you don't want to explain your strategy, then don't claim that it's my fault you're not going to.

I'd prefer the automatic creation of a discussion tab, which would serve the same purpose with more functionality.

There are several ways to find good mods that don't revolve around sorting by rating.

1. Sort by number of downloads
2. Check the list of three featured mods at the top of the mods page that is updated periodically
3. Ask people, or find existing threads such as this one
4. Download mods that intrigue you and find out how good they are by yourself

 

Yes, my mistake there. Now that I think about it, you're right, you don't need ratings at all, and removing them would be better since it's a flawed system on here. Still, however, it would be nice to have more categorisation, which is what I meant to say instead.

People use the tags , but searching for mods using only tags is not popular or viable, also because the tags are not detailed enough.
--- Post updated ---

Here you go reaching again, jumping to conclusions as you've continued to do. It's what's known as: Putting words into my mouth.

Find me the exact post I explicitly threatened you with the words "I am shifting the blame onto you, I claim it is your fault now for this mess, it's all your fault, you started it" Because never once did I explicitly say that it was your fault. Not once. Not once did I claim it in words. You perceived it as such, you thought it was, and you thought it true, and yknow that's fine by me if you want to think that I said something I didn't say. It's delusional some would say. Doesn't help your flawed attempt at "debating" though.

I did say your arguments were pointless at a certain point however, and that remains. Your flame war hasn't finished I take it?

 

Indeed. We had this, was removed for reasons unknown...

I read most of the forum threads I get in my "What's new" list, so I'm more likely to find out about issues of a mod (even ones I haven't downloaded yet) in a forum thread where eventual workarounds might be available. A forum discussion is also more likely to provide valuable info about planned development by the author him/herself.

 

You're still deliberately attempting to detract from the original point of this argument: that your idea was flawed. You can't even admit that, even though that's arguably a gross understatement.

And never once did you explain how they were pointless. I take it elaboration just isn't your thing.

I definitely now think automatic discussion tabs should replace reviews. I can't really think of any downsides, and according to you (I joined the forums after the feature was removed) it's entirely possible. It'd be interesting to hear from the devs why they changed it.

 

Simply not in the mood to elaborate on what you'd like.

Why should I admit something false if I don't think It's wrong or flawed? For what purpose should I continue to "debate" with you on all these things? It's all semantics again. Why instead can't you just drop your own personal flamewar like that, and go do something more important?

 

Definitely possible, most forum threads with the notation "* author * submitted a new resource" and a following preview of the repository frontpage were created automatically as soon as the mod was approved by the staff. In this case, the "Discussion" tab in the repository frontpage points directly to the linked forum thread.

Example

Feature was probably removed to save forum space.

 

The way I see it, is that people should be able to rate how they want. If a rating is just a >5 word "best mod ever" or "__ glitch is only happening go me" rating, then report it/reply to it. If anything were to be changed about this system it should be a minimum word limit and a red check box (like the thread bump warning) that says not to rate based on a bug. Don't let a small group of people who don't know how to properly use a rating-review system ruin it for everyone else.

 

Thread bump warning hasn't helped much so far, and stricter character limits would only promote meaningless, unsubstantial reviews.

 

And thats fine. People should feel free to make meaningless reviews if they want to. Its not hurting anyone. As for people who ignore or abuse character limits or the bug report warning, then report them and let the moderators handle it.

 

Excellent idea!

Let's give the swamped forum staff more work to do by turning a broken system into an even more broken one!

They can well spend their whole workday cleaning up the fruit of "freedom" after all...!

/s

This makes frankly no sense. What would be the point meaningless reviews and unreasonable ratings? That defeats the informative purpose of reviews altogether in my book, turning the whole system into yet another instrument in the hands of the lazy-ass meme crowd.

Forum users could start using their brains every once in a while, instead of letting moderators handle everything and then blame them for the "unfair treatment" they received...

 

I don't understand how having a minimum character/word count will create meaningless reviews. If anything, it will deter the "lazy meme" crowd from writing a review because they would be forced to put effort into what they are posting.

 

That's another thing altogether. As it was worded in your previous message, it sounded like you wanted lower word/character limit...

 

Oh sorry for the confusion, I didn't really word it too well. I fixed it now.

 

If someone makes a pointless review, I just report it as abusive and let the admins delete it if they see fit. Only about %1 of users leave a rating, which is more of a bummer than the odd pointless one.

 

Double posted. Sorry.