Is there a problem with the 'Rate This Thread' Option ?

[Quadart]

Nonsense. There is absolutely no such “moderated quality control” going on. However there are some anomalies in the ratings, which have negligible effect on the system, however I’ll have a look into it.

Nonsense? Whether absolutely true or not, it is a perfectly viable scenario—far from nonsense.

There may have to be a few adjustments made to numbers on the back end so that really popular work shine over the “my friends are helping me pad the numbers” work. It’s a work in progress. Hang in there.

*from the current ‘Voting Bug’ sister thread in the support forum.

Whether purely algorithmic or manually manipulated, I’d call that system-bias, moderated (filtered) quality control. The non-5-point valued vote/units that comprise the vote average are all 4-point units, which can be viewed as 4-star votes, whether algorithmic or manual.

**Not to say that’s a bad thing. I think it is necessary, since I think that there is just as much (actually more) of a problem with rampant overvaluation in general, as there was with down-voting devaluation in the old system.

[khendar]

Nonsense? Whether absolutely true or not, it is a perfectly viable scenario—far from nonsense.

*from the current ‘Voting Bug’ sister thread in the support forum.

Whether purely algorithmic or manually manipulated, I’d call that system-bias, moderated (filtered) quality control. The non-5-point valued vote/units that comprise the vote average are all 4-point units, which can be viewed as 4-star votes, whether algorithmic or manual.

Yes nonsense. We do not change the ratings. Period. What we are tweaking is how many votes are needed over how much time before a thread is marked with stars. That’s what Kirt is referring to. If a thread receives x number of 5 star votes, that is how many they have.

**Not to say that’s a bad thing. I think it is necessary, since I think that there is just as much (actually more) of a problem with rampant overvaluation in general, as there was with down-voting devaluation in the old system.

Based on what ? Have you performed analysis of the trends in extreme voting? Because I have, and the actual numbers tell a different story. If you do not have access to the raw data, you are unable to make any sort of judgements on this. I’m afraid you’ll just have to trust me

[Quadart]

Yes nonsense. We do not change the ratings. Period. What we are tweaking is how many votes are needed over how much time before a thread is marked with stars. That’s what Kirt is referring to. If a thread receives x number of 5 star votes, that is how many they have.

Based on what ? Have you performed analysis of the trends in extreme voting? Because I have, and the actual numbers tell a different story. If you do not have access to the raw data, you are unable to make any sort of judgements on this. I’m afraid you’ll just have to trust me

I trust you! I trust you!
I greatly appreciate your informative reply. Information is good.
I can put away the chicken bones and astrological charts now. :argh:

“Based on what?”

1. I saw a trend of extreme voting, based on closely tracking quite a few old-system entry vote histories (over time), using an Excel table I put together for the purpose (though not as rigorous a process based on the detailed and complete vote history data of every entry in each of the galleries (which of course I’m not privy to).
2. It’s obvious (to me) that there is a consistent overvaluation trend in play concluded simply by looking at the images and their vote averages (again, referencing old-system entries). Yes, this is a subjective opinion, with the realization that some subjective opinions are more objective than others (e.g. this is why the general voting community does not have the final say in what gets a choice award).

[Djampa]

Pity to know about people giving 1 star to good artworks.

Anyway I hope the new systems works fair to everybody, it seems strange to me, I liked rating system, but I understand the points here.

Anyway I value more the comments as any stars, and I used to spend some time clicking over any, literally ANY artwork posted, not only hot ones, I think that’s what makes us a community isn’t ?
To look for some great inspirational artwork as well to help and advice, motivate, others who are just starting on the path right ?

After all I think Jack is right:

imo, get rid of the stars (not saying get rid of the rating system). there are 8 years of old works in choice gala rated as 4 stars and now all of sudden 5 stars everywhere. get rid of the stars so nothing conflicts with the old habits. start something new.

Best wishes to everybody,

[simoncheng]

but in the end only with 4-5 stars will make the artwork into CG Choice Gallery.
i agree with some friends here about stars sytem, not every artwork with 4-5 stars is great artwork. we still need to see the overall detail, creativity, originality, effort, passion and development.

no offense here, in the past year some of cg mate use download model, place it nicely and render it own skill still manage can get 4-5 stars! they really lack of creativity or original skill.
the only skill i saw is rendering.
this is totally unhealthy to the cg industry.
cgsociety is one of the leader cg community and should have a proper solution and sytem to generate much more talent, skill and great cg people and not only the artwork itself.
a good cg artist will produce good artwork.

thank you.

*i m one from the short of stars player but never give up in this cg industry coz i believe there is an evolution and working hard to see the change.

[fionabus]

Thanks! I was getting really frustrated by my work getting two star reviews and less polished works getting four!

This makes me feel better…

[CGTalk_Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.