Over-rated and Under-rated courses

[Olorin]

Tim has answered several times that Average = 2.0, as labeled, but that 2.5 might also be considered Average. Now 2.5 is labeled Above Average, though.

I'm just trying to save Tim the time of having to retype this since he's done so several times already.

When you read my reviews you need to know that I rate courses as
Average = 2.5
Below Average = 2.0
So you might want to subtract 0.5 discs from my ratings btwn 1.5-3.5 to get it on the DGCR Standard Scale.

 

[Olorin]

Ok, I've added words to each step of the scale. Hopefully the controversy will now end

I could also do the following but it's pretty much semantics at that point and nobody would really have to change their ratings since the difference between what "Fair" means and "Average" is debatable. It would just be to satisfy those that can't deal with the "Average" label being at 2.0 My preference is to leave it as is.

0.0 - Abysmal
0.5 - Very Poor
1.0 - Poor
1.5 - Bad
2.0 - Fair
2.5 - Average
3.0 - Good
3.5 - Very Good
4.0 - Excellent
4.5 - Phenomenal
5.0 - Best of the Best

I can certainly live with this. Just be prepared to keep pointing people back to this answer when the next batches of new users ask again (and again and again and again...). You might want to make a concise FAQ to point them to.

 

[timg]

I don't think most people are quite this caught up in the labels as you might think. Out of almost 3000 people registered I think this is an issue with maybe.. 10 people? With every option spelled out, the only people that would continue to question the scale would be those that want to change it.

The best thing would be to just remove the labels entirely and avoid the drama. They were just meant to act as guides to help the scoring process.

 

[gcoghill]

I may need to go back and change my reviews, I had always thought of 3 as Average -- my thinking was from 1 to 5, 3 was in the middle (1 & 2 below, 4 & 5 above). I never noticed the zero disc rating, or maybe that was recently added in response to this thread.

The zero rating seems odd because there is no way to determine if the course was actually given a disc rating. If I saw all the discs empty on the course overview page, I would think the course received no ratings yet, when in fact it could have received 13 zero ratings. To me 1 should be the lowest.

Giving the half-discs actual tier names (and adding the zero disc tier) basically just bumps this scale to a 0-10 scale. I had always thought of the half-rating (in any review) as less of a specific level and more of an "in between" rating to indicate "it's better than good, but not great" as opposed to specifically "Very Good".

When I browse the courses by ratings, my mind sees anything below a 3 as 'below average' and I usually put that course on the "not worth it" list.

1: Poor
2: So-So
3: Good
4: Great
5: Excellent

 

[timg]

The 0 rating has been there for a long time. If a course has no reviews, it'll say "No Reviews" but if it has a 0, it'll show 5 blank discs.

Regarding how you interpreted the scale, that is how I imagined others doing it (except with 2 being "average/fair/insert synonym here"). Obviously, some prefer it to be a little more concrete instead of open for interpretation. I really would have preferred to leave the scale as is.

 

[DGtourist]

I seems like lots of people look at it as 1-5 and not 0-5.0.

 

[DGtourist]

The 0 rating has been there for a long time. If a course has no reviews, it'll say "No Reviews" but if it has a 0, it'll show 5 blank discs.

Regarding how you interpreted the scale, that is how I imagined others doing it (except with 2 being "average/fair/insert synonym here"). Obviously, some prefer it to be a little more concrete instead of open for interpretation.

Is this the negative side of always taking suggestions? You do a good job man, I don't care how you move that 1/2 disc in the middle. This site will still rule either way.

 

[gcoghill]

Yeah, "Fair" is better than So-So

Now that you mention it, I do recall seeing the "No Reviews" as opposed to zero discs. But as someone who frequents the site and has written reviews, I still think of zero discs as not having reviews (well until now that is). I guess what I am saying is that a casual visitor might think the same.

I am just posting to give some feedback regarding how it looks to me for informational purposes; I am cool with however Tim sees fit. That's how UI design goes I suppose, you do what seems best and then get the feedback from actual usage and tweak from there.

 

[timg]

I like suggestions, they are what helps to make the site better. I should just remove the word "Average" and replace it with a synonym. That seems to be the sticking point.

 

[timg]

Yeah, "Fair" is better than So-So

Now that you mention it, I do recall seeing the "No Reviews" as opposed to zero discs. But as someone who frequents the site and has written reviews, I still think of zero discs as not having reviews (well until now that is). I guess what I am saying is that a casual visitor might think the same.

I am just posting to give some feedback regarding how it looks to me for informational purposes; I am cool with however Tim sees fit. That's how UI design goes I suppose, you do what seems best and then get the feedback from actual usage and tweak from there.

I remember a while back someone wanted a 0 rating so I added it. I had to do a bunch of tweaks to get it to show 5 empty discs vs. "No Reviews".

 

[Olorin]

I should just remove the word "Average" and replace it with a synonym. That seems to be the sticking point.

Please don't change the word Average. Also, the labels only help to avoid confusion, not to increase it. From reading these threads it seems that most people DO want to know the standard for average. I think it's the starting point, and most people want an objective standard to go from. Then the next question is how much above or below that is it?

Also, I'm glad you have a 0 for the really abysmal courses that should be avoided or need a major overhaul.

 

[DGtourist]

We did know the standard. It seems now that people want to change it.

 

[DGtourist]

people are already overrating courses too much as it is. I bet I have about 10 courses were I have given it the lowest score, trust me, I'M NOT the one being misleading here. I just got like 3 more neg votes, and it all comes back to this. I'm not going to give an average course a 2.5. Because average = 2.

or it did.

 

[timg]

Still does for the foreseeable future. I'd consider swapping "Fair" for "Below Average" and switch 2.5 to "Average" since those labels pretty much mean the same thing and it seems like it would make a few people feel better.

 

[DGtourist]

After almost 5000 reviews I wouldn't change something like the scale.

I have to admit those neg vote ticks me off a little. Because they all have that I gave them a 2 (which is what they all deserve) in common.

Here they are. Benedict Park Brighton CO Mylar Park Cheyenne WY and Loomiler Park Longmont CO

They are all 2 disc-worthy, 9 hole park courses, lacking in one way or another. Two without signs one without tee boxes or length two without obstacles. They are almost exactly like every 9 hole park course I have ever played in that they are largely unmemorable. In each case I am the one who gave it their current lowest score, mostly due to HBB offsetting what is IMO a very honest assessment based on the true scale.

 

[timg]

The scale is filled out now to remove any ambiguity and I will keep it as is.

2.5 is obviously still considered "Average" in a general sense just as it was before. It's just spelled out now rather than being part of a range.

If the scale was 0,1,2,3,4,5 (as it used to be) which number would you label as "Average"? If you make it 3, you have more options on the low end of the spectrum. If you make it 2, you have more options on the higher end (my preference). Then the half points were added as a way to indicate a course was "better than a 2 but not quite a 3" without having to spell it out in your review.

 

[DGtourist]

stupid question perhaps, but where is the scale? I've only ever seen the scale on the dropdown menu when you write the review.

 

[timg]

That's the only place it is on the site.

 

[magictenor1]

I got on to the site fairly early on and I don't remember the zero being there but maybe it was. I think of the rating as 1 to 5 ergo 3 is average. I don't understand the need for zero. Zero would be if there was no course.

 

[magictenor1]

Just out of curiosity,when was zero added?