A poll about changing the rating system!

[rssllue]

Cake and eating it too I see. Wise play.

[angela9]

4 is a bit narrow. Half stars would be best. What about those that have already been rated. How would that change?

[Gravy]

4 is a bit narrow. Half stars would be best. What about those that have already been rated. How would that change?

They could either stay as you rated them (it worked at the time) or be re-rated, up or down
That's one reason I'm for half stars, it won't nullify prior official reviews, they can't really be changed to reflect a five star rating system

[vortex189]

I am new. Is there I distinguished rating system?

[anonanemone]

The current system and completed reviews are 4-star right now.

[Mike_Lang]

I am new. Is there I distinguished rating system?

They use a 4-star rating system here, no half stars. Some other sites use 5-star ratings with or without half stars.

[bookowlie]

Wow, it's still a horse race. I continue to have mixed feelings about a prospective change. Changing to a 1/2 star system would be good, since there would still be the same 4 stars as the highest option. However, I still like the idea of moving to a 5 star system since there I think authors don't like getting 2 or 2.5 stars. Using a 5-star system would allow a book to rated a 3 as a midway point - less harsh in the eyes of an author vs. getting 2 or 2.5 stars. I think people will view 3 stars as neutral rather than 2 or 2.5 stars, which carries a negative connotaton, in my opinion. I also like Scott's initial assessment that the current system forces the reviewers to think more about the rating. Oh dear, I am no help whatsoever!

[gali]

Wow, it's still a horse race. I continue to have mixed feelings about a prospective change. Changing to a 1/2 star system would be good, since there would still be the same 4 stars as the highest option. However, I still like the idea of moving to a 5 star system since there I think authors don't like getting 2 or 2.5 stars. Using a 5-star system would allow a book to rated a 3 as a midway point - less harsh in the eyes of an author vs. getting 2 or 2.5 stars. I think people will view 3 stars as neutral rather than 2 or 2.5 stars, which carries a negative connotaton, in my opinion. I also like Scott's initial assessment that the current system forces the reviewers to think more about the rating. Oh dear, I am no help whatsoever!

I have mixed feelings about it as well.

[Mike_Lang]

While I agree that the current 4-star rating system forces the reviewer to think more about the rating I'm not sure that has any great benefit in the end result, as there is no midpoint it would seem to me that we essentially have a pass or fail system.

If nothing else I'd like to see a simple 2.5 rating added to the current system. I know it can seem like a cop-out or a non-decision decision but the reality is that some books - I dare say a good percentage of them - are neither good nor bad, they're just okay. Something to read and occupy the time. The literary equivilant of a fast food dollar menu item...not that there's anything wrong with that!

For clarification purposes, I am not referring to one genre being better than another - I am a huge fan of pulp type ficion which many would describe as trash fiction, I likes what I likes - I am saying that within any given genre there are some that are better than others, some that are worse, and some that are nothing more than pleasant ways to waste time, that aren't necessarily great but at the same time not worthy of a negative rating. I think of 2-stars as a negative rating - while 3-stars with the current 4-star rating system is, in my opinion, along the lines of a better than average rating (there's no middle ground).

[bookowlie]

While I agree that the current 4-star rating system forces the reviewer to think more about the rating I'm not sure that has any great benefit in the end result, as there is no midpoint it would seem to me that we essentially have a pass or fail system.

If nothing else I'd like to see a simple 2.5 rating added to the current system. I know it can seem like a cop-out or a non-decision decision but the reality is that some books - I dare say a good percentage of them - are neither good nor bad, they're just okay. Something to read and occupy the time. The literary equivilant of a fast food dollar menu item...not that there's anything wrong with that!

For clarification purposes, I am not referring to one genre being better than another - I am a huge fan of pulp type ficion which many would describe as trash fiction, I likes what I likes - I am saying that within any given genre there are some that are better than others, some that are worse, and some that are nothing more than pleasant ways to waste time, that aren't necessarily great but at the same time not worthy of a negative rating. I think of 2-stars as a negative rating - while 3-stars with the current 4-star rating system is, in my opinion, along the lines of a better than average rating (there's no middle ground).

Well said.

[denalfit]

5 point

[bookowlie]

5 point

Hi Denalfit and welcome to the forums! Please note that you can vote in the official poll once you have posted at least 10 posts (not counting posts in the off-topic discussions).

[rssllue]

[Hiew Yi Sa]

Hi, guys I am just a newbie. Can anyone teach me know how to vote? Thanks.

[rssllue]

You need to have ten posts on the forums before you can vote in polls.