Recent Posts11
The Fridge / Rating YOUR ratings?!
« Last post by ImpracticalDino on Today at 12:06:53 AM »Hello-o-o, Mu-u-ud Brotherrrs! 
Yesterday, @StardustSoldier gave this fishy the inspiration to talk about a topic that I think is quite interesting. This involves any movies, books, or any type of medium really that can be reviewed and rated upon. When rating something we invest our time in, the point of that is to gauge how much we liked/enjoyed the thing we indulged in already. To have a tangible, quick basis on how we measure our like/dislike for something, we usually score something numerically or by quantity.
It can be something like, rating an LBT film from a numerical range of 0-5, 0-10, 0-100, with 0 being the worst dislike and the highest number being the best enjoyment/like, for example. You can also rate something numerically by quantity of something tangible, like from 0-5 stars. More uncommonly (though commonly in academics), things can be rated based on the alphabet from a scale of A to F, with A being the best and F being the worst quality letter grade.
With that out of the way, this leads me to something that I've kinda pondered for awhile now. What exactly do any of the ratings given out mean to us personally? What makes a film a 5/10, 7/10, 9/10, and so on? There are certainly a lot of nuance and biases to take into account when we assign a numerical value or letter grade to something that we've watched, read, used, etc.
For example, we all have varying opinions on what a number rating from 0-10 can actually mean. For some, a 5/10 simply means average. Not bad, not good. Some start at that rating as a base line. Some can also use that rating for something that may be pretty bad but just want to be nice about it. And as for being nice, 7/10 is usually considered "good" but nothing more. Usually used as a safe rating by many reviewers that do not want to give something a higher or lower rating for some reason, perhaps this rating is a baseline for some as well. And sometimes, the same ratings can mean something different depending on your personal varying standards or comparison to something else you've already rated.
What does everyone here think about the way they review and rate certain things? When giving out specific ratings, like 5/10 or 7/10 for example, why was that rating assigned personally in the first place? What standard or line of thought led to that? Can it be justified? Let Mo-o-o know! I'm super interested in the insight and reflections about this.
Yesterday, @StardustSoldier gave this fishy the inspiration to talk about a topic that I think is quite interesting. This involves any movies, books, or any type of medium really that can be reviewed and rated upon. When rating something we invest our time in, the point of that is to gauge how much we liked/enjoyed the thing we indulged in already. To have a tangible, quick basis on how we measure our like/dislike for something, we usually score something numerically or by quantity.
It can be something like, rating an LBT film from a numerical range of 0-5, 0-10, 0-100, with 0 being the worst dislike and the highest number being the best enjoyment/like, for example. You can also rate something numerically by quantity of something tangible, like from 0-5 stars. More uncommonly (though commonly in academics), things can be rated based on the alphabet from a scale of A to F, with A being the best and F being the worst quality letter grade.
With that out of the way, this leads me to something that I've kinda pondered for awhile now. What exactly do any of the ratings given out mean to us personally? What makes a film a 5/10, 7/10, 9/10, and so on? There are certainly a lot of nuance and biases to take into account when we assign a numerical value or letter grade to something that we've watched, read, used, etc.
For example, we all have varying opinions on what a number rating from 0-10 can actually mean. For some, a 5/10 simply means average. Not bad, not good. Some start at that rating as a base line. Some can also use that rating for something that may be pretty bad but just want to be nice about it. And as for being nice, 7/10 is usually considered "good" but nothing more. Usually used as a safe rating by many reviewers that do not want to give something a higher or lower rating for some reason, perhaps this rating is a baseline for some as well. And sometimes, the same ratings can mean something different depending on your personal varying standards or comparison to something else you've already rated.
What does everyone here think about the way they review and rate certain things? When giving out specific ratings, like 5/10 or 7/10 for example, why was that rating assigned personally in the first place? What standard or line of thought led to that? Can it be justified? Let Mo-o-o know! I'm super interested in the insight and reflections about this.
