Does anyone else rate people the "correct" way?

[colton24]

i try to but now i got so many games going i forget sometimes how they played if the feedback system was still in place it would be easier cause you could put in what you thought not just little check boxes

[owenshooter]

i try to but now i got so many games going i forget sometimes how they played if the feedback system was still in place it would be easier cause you could put in what you thought not just little check boxes

this is coming from someone who routinely flames, baits, trolls and abuses things like the C&A forum... not to mention, i would hate to be blessed with your horrible grammar upon my wall... how can you comment on something you never had to deal with? i could easily see you flooding the C&A with complaints about feedback people left you. you already complain about stuff on your wall, and you can moderate that yourself!!-0

[oVo]

[...] i forget sometimes how they played [...]

How do you expect to leave accurate feedback for a player you don't remember?

[strike wolf]

I usually rank people highly unless they really ticke me off or had very poor strategy (LIKE ME!) but even then most of the time I just wouldn't rank them instead of giving them a one star.

[colton24]

i try to but now i got so many games going i forget sometimes how they played if the feedback system was still in place it would be easier cause you could put in what you thought not just little check boxes

this is coming from someone who routinely flames, baits, trolls and abuses things like the C&A forum... not to mention, i would hate to be blessed with your horrible grammar upon my wall... how can you comment on something you never had to deal with? i could easily see you flooding the C&A with complaints about feedback people left you. you already complain about stuff on your wall, and you can moderate that yourself!!-0

yeah watever...

[PLAYER57832]

Keep 'em happy when the goal of the game is to eliminate players? heh!

Some players are very forgiving with their ratings. For instance, sanman678 and emporium both played games with a pair of cheats and still managed to give each of them all 5 Star ratings.

I have probably done the same. Unless someone acts like a jerk in a game I am playing, I will rate them with all 5's .. .and usually just blank it if they miss turns or such.

Again, the real problem is its just too much work to really rate someone's full performance. If you can remember one game, that's about all. This is why I suggest doing just that --rating for one game.

I also want to add some tags for things like swearing that don't matter to some people, but matter a lot to a few.

[freakns]

if they play a game fairly, ill give them 5 stars. if they miss a move, ill never going to rate them. only if(and thats only 2 players out of 1200+ games i have played) a player is abusive or absurdly bad so he completely screw up a game ill give him 0 ratings.

but i agree, i really dont see a point in ratings as with this system they represent nothing...

[stahrgazer]

To me, a 3 is neutral. If I don't see something exceptional in the play or chat, and haven't played the person (with or against) before, I'll give a 3 or 4 for that area. If I see something exceptionally good, 4 or 5; exceptionally bad, 1. Players who've contacted me about "bad ratings" of 3 or 4, I've offered to play again so that I can see some consistent "good" which to me, rates "outstanding."

Any rating system is highly subjective, and there are those players who don't like a rating so egg up friends to go play and bombard another player with 1's.

The key for ratings, then, is not to look at the numbers, but to go further, look at rating trends and peek into games that caused individual rating outliers.

It seems that if you give a player average ratings, this is construed as negative. If you do leave that rating, the other player will hit you with a low rating, lowering your own score. I only leave now positive scores for decent players or good play, or good spirit in adversity (poor dice rolls) and don't bother with a negative rating.

So now, if I play someone who is dumb, deadbeat or plays a deferred bonus strategy, if I don't want to play them then I foe them.

When I rate films. it is exceptional films that get 5* or very good films get 4*. In CC, a 5* = a good rating and 4*= an average rating. Even then, you can only really leave a 4* rating without risking a hit on your rating.

Not quite sure what a better system would be. I guess, that if one player irritates you enough then you share it with a low rating.

[xeno]

i leave almost everyone i play all 5's in hopes they will return the favor.

[PLAYER57832]

To me, a 3 is neutral. If I don't see something exceptional in the play or chat, and haven't played the person (with or against) before, I'll give a 3 or 4 for that area. If I see something exceptionally good, 4 or 5; exceptionally bad, 1. Players who've contacted me about "bad ratings" of 3 or 4, I've offered to play again so that I can see some consistent "good" which to me, rates "outstanding."

Any rating system is highly subjective, and there are those players who don't like a rating so egg up friends to go play and bombard another player with 1's.

The key for ratings, then, is not to look at the numbers, but to go further, look at rating trends and peek into games that caused individual rating outliers.

With respect, this just takes far too much work and anymore, really does not tell anything because people are just too inconsistant.

I see a 3 and its hard to tell if its from someone like you or someone who just was in a bad mood, or someone who had a real "issue" with a game. "Delving" as you say, requires me to review several games, look at each rater's profile. Each time I do that, I have to re-do the search. Its way too much work for just about everyone!

[Timminz]

I won't rate anyone anymore. Not unless I notice that their rating is way off from where I think it should be. Then I have to do my part to bring their average down.

[ender516]

I won't rate anyone anymore. Not unless I notice that their rating is way off from where I think it should be. Then I have to do my part to bring their average down.

So you never find someone underrated that needs a boost?

[Timminz]

I won't rate anyone anymore. Not unless I notice that their rating is way off from where I think it should be. Then I have to do my part to bring their average down.

So you never find someone underrated that needs a boost?

Not lately. With the majority of players throwing around 5's like they can win something for it, I think almost everyone is over-rated, but only a few are over-rated enough to warrant me caring.

[MeDeFe]

i leave almost everyone i play all 5's in hopes they will return the favor.

And this is why the current rating system has failed.

[Timminz]

I won't rate anyone anymore. Not unless I notice that their rating is way off from where I think it should be. Then I have to do my part to bring their average down.

So you never find someone underrated that needs a boost?

Not lately. With the majority of players throwing around 5's like they can win something for it, I think almost everyone is over-rated, but only a few are over-rated enough to warrant me caring.

I just noticed my use of the word 'down'. While that is the way it works, almost every time, it isn't necessarily always the case. If I play a game with someone who has a low (under 4.5-ish) rating, and I feel that they played an excellent game, I will do my part to bring their average up.

[jefjef]

i try to but now i got so many games going i forget sometimes how they played if the feedback system was still in place it would be easier cause you could put in what you thought not just little check boxes

So your familiar with the "old feedback system"? So you were here before? Who are you colton?............. Any way I see the rating system set up as starting at all 5 and reduced from that as needed. If a player is absolutely silent I never give attitude a 5. If the game was enjoyable and pretty mistake free game play is a 5. If there wasn't a hint of cheat or some BS truce or dirty tricks fair play is a 5.

[PLAYER57832]

I won't rate anyone anymore. Not unless I notice that their rating is way off from where I think it should be. Then I have to do my part to bring their average down.

So you never find someone underrated that needs a boost?

Not lately. With the majority of players throwing around 5's like they can win something for it, I think almost everyone is over-rated, but only a few are over-rated enough to warrant me caring.

I just noticed my use of the word 'down'. While that is the way it works, almost every time, it isn't necessarily always the case. If I play a game with someone who has a low (under 4.5-ish) rating, and I feel that they played an excellent game, I will do my part to bring their average up.

This is why I no longer pay any attention at all to people's ratings. I am going to stop rating pretty quick, too, except maybe newbies or, as you say, people who have pretty irrelevant ratings.

[MeDeFe]

i try to but now i got so many games going i forget sometimes how they played if the feedback system was still in place it would be easier cause you could put in what you thought not just little check boxes

So your familiar with the "old feedback system"? So you were here before? Who are you colton?............. Any way I see the rating system set up as starting at all 5 and reduced from that as needed. If a player is absolutely silent I never give attitude a 5. If the game was enjoyable and pretty mistake free game play is a 5. If there wasn't a hint of cheat or some BS truce or dirty tricks fair play is a 5.

This is another reason why the current rating system has failed. "Start at 5", you're kidding, right? Please say you were. Or are you of the opinion that "we're all winners, it doesn't matter how we did or where we finished, we're all winners"?

The number of stars given should be based on this scale: 1 = Bad, 2 = Below Average, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = Excellent.

But nooo, you have to give everyone and their mother 5 stars unless they assrape you with tentacles in the gamechat and team up with everyone else to kill you off when you're down and bleeding. ok, maybe you'd give 1 star then, but my point is valid. You are misusing, possibly abusing, the rating system by giving misleading ratings about players.

[Kotaro]

I've been, as of late, giving everyone I play 3's, unless they catch my eye as a star player, or a shitty one at that.
Bet my ratings will plummet now, since people will want revenge, but I don't really care too much.

[danfrank]

What amuses me to this day is that people actually care about ratings. Personally i dont care.. I give good ones and bad ones .. Mainly to amuse myself.. and of course to get the medal.. I personally think the ratings create more of problem with then without them.. There would still be foe list to express how you feel about someone..

[jefjef]

Well MeDeFe. If you look I don't give all 5 stars. If the game was a fun game & very well played 5 stars. If play was poor it is reflected. Fair play as long as all was fair & on the up & up how does it not deserve 5 stars. Your attitude just got a 2. Now do ya get it? You don't rate if ya win or lose. You rate on ENJOYMENT(game play) Honesty (fair play) & Friendliness (attitude).

[captainwalrus]

I try to give 3's mostly but people get pissed off if you give them like a 3 and it was a close game.

[Georgerx7di]

I hate this thread. Just give everybody 5's and stop being difficult.

[MeDeFe]

Well MeDeFe. If you look I don't give all 5 stars. If the game was a fun game & very well played 5 stars. If play was poor it is reflected. Fair play as long as all was fair & on the up & up how does it not deserve 5 stars. Your attitude just got a 2. Now do ya get it? You don't rate if ya win or lose. You rate on ENJOYMENT(game play) Honesty (fair play) & Friendliness (attitude).

Oh? Suddenly it has to be a "fun & very well played" game for 5 stars, in your last post you stated that you start with 5 as the baseline and that you only subtracted stars if the other player gave you a reason for it, now it sounds like the other player has to give you a reason to rate them highly. Make up your mind, will you?


And where did I say "win or lose" goes into the ratings? Oh, that's right, I never did.

[jefjef]

Well MeDeFe. If you look I don't give all 5 stars. If the game was a fun game & very well played 5 stars. If play was poor it is reflected. Fair play as long as all was fair & on the up & up how does it not deserve 5 stars. Your attitude just got a 2. Now do ya get it? You don't rate if ya win or lose. You rate on ENJOYMENT(game play) Honesty (fair play) & Friendliness (attitude).

Oh? Suddenly it has to be a "fun & very well played" game for 5 stars, in your last post you stated that you start with 5 as the baseline and that you only subtracted stars if the other player gave you a reason for it, now it sounds like the other player has to give you a reason to rate them highly. Make up your mind, will you?


And where did I say "win or lose" goes into the ratings? Oh, that's right, I never did.

uh. what? Nothing changed. read. understand. And yes I substract stars if there is a reason it doesn't deserve all them stars. 1 star to you.