Over-rated and Under-rated courses

[REDARMY]

on the subject of overrated courses, i've gotta throw in creve coeur park here in st. louis to that list. i think the average rating right now is 3 discs, but after playing (and reviewing) the course today, it deserves lower than 3. i think the inflated ratings are due to either lack of other-course experience from the other reviewers (not an insult), or just a misconception that anything that has to do with creve coeur (one of the richest counties in the city) is better than the rest of the city/county.

 

[sidewinding]

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.

And we would'nt have to rewexplain the evolution of the scale every few months because it would be self explanatory.

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

Having a word for every increment is not necessary and it does in fact clutter the scale. A course can be between average and good without needing a word to describe it.

What if you move the wording to the .5 increments? Noone would need to change any reviews because the 2's would still be in the grey area between bad and average and the 3's would be in the grey area between good and average. There's not really words that can describe worst than terrible or better than excellent so all the current reviews would still be valid and the people who think average should be in the middle (like Olorin) would be happy.

0.0 -
0.5 - Terrible
1.0 -
1.5 - Bad
2.0 -
2.5 - Average
3.0 -
3.5 - Good
4.0 -
4.5 - Excellent
5.0 -

 

[timg]

I think adding labels only to the half points looks confusing. People like to have a defined beginning and end which is kind of ambiguous in that scale.

 

[ERicJ]

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

Thanks. I think it looks good. Now everyone who can read knows what scale they should use when they write their reviews.

 

[ERicJ]

Please, please change the label for Average to 2.5.
[...]
I'm loathe to take a position opposed to ERicJ, but I suppose that I will anyway. (Let the spreadsheet barrages begin!)

I'm not vehement opposed to a change of 2.5 becoming average. Several valid points have been made about the casual users' assumption of what average might be. Side-windey-guy has also rightly pointed out that if this is to change, better to do it now than later.

If Tim did decide to change the scale I'd need to go back and update many/most of my reviews, because I start my thought process at "what is average?" and go up or down from there. It would suck.

What I am vehemently opposed to is people blatantly disregarding the scale as documented. E.g. treating 2.5 as "Average", or using a 1-to-5 lopsided topheavy scale. When you're working within the confines of DGCR you should conform to the standards that it sets. If a British citizen arrives in the U.S. and tries to spend their pounds sterling how far do they get? Not very far until they convert to good ol' U.S. $.

ERic

 

[ERicJ]

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.

Gawd no! Rating inflation is bad enough as it is.

 

[ERicJ]

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.

Ummm... yeah. I coulda read that before posting earlier. That's exactly what I do.

 

[Olorin]

What I am vehemently opposed to is people blatantly disregarding the scale as documented. E.g. treating 2.5 as "Average"

But Tim has said several times that 2.5 is also in the Average range, in spite of what the labels say.

 

[timg]

But Tim has said several times that 2.5 is also in the Average range, in spite of what the labels say.

Last I checked, the word "Average" was next to 2.5. It was just preceded by another word. So the labels are correct.

 

[Olorin]

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

It's also in the Course Directory where you filter by Rating. Course Directory/ Browse Courses/ Rating.

 

[Olorin]

1)

I would consider 2.0-2.5 to be average with 2.5 being slightly above average but average none the less. That entire range would fall under the "Average" label. So look at the scale as a set of ranges with the labels denoting where that range starts.

2)

Last I checked, the word "Average" was next to 2.5. It was just preceded by another word. So the labels are correct.

[Background ambience: a regularly spaced whipping sound onto unresponsive flesh.]

I'm an engineer who failed English, and I'm somewhat obtuse. I assume that quote 1) is now obsolete, or better said, it's been clarified, so that 2.5 is no longer in the Average range.

 

[ERicJ]

What I am vehemently opposed to is people blatantly disregarding the scale as documented. E.g. treating 2.5 as "Average"...

But Tim has said several times that 2.5 is also in the Average range, in spite of what the labels say.

Last I checked, the word "Average" was next to 2.5. It was just preceded by another word. So the labels are correct.

As far as I recall, Tim has always stated that 2.5 is "above average", i.e. "better than average".

If I asked Olorin for a list of the courses he considers "average" he'd give me all his 2.5's. Ask me and I'll give you all my 2's. The ratings are unnecessarily skewed. It just frustrates me that even now with a clearly defined scale, especially on what an average rating is, people still chose to pick their own values. But considering there's probably at least a half point margin of error with what people consider an average course, I'm about ready to give up tilting at this windmill.

Heck, all those people that only play Flip City should be giving it a 2 rating. If they don't know anything else, then to them that has to be an average course.

ERic

 

[Olorin]

What I am vehemently opposed to is people blatantly disregarding the scale as documented. E.g. treating 2.5 as "Average"... When you're working within the confines of DGCR you should conform to the standards that it sets.

I'll now try to cease from my rebellion. I've now moved to Stepford, so I'll conform to 2.0 = Average. Oops... there's a bell ringing... gotta go...

 

[timg]

1)
I'm an engineer who failed English, and I'm somewhat obtuse. I assume that quote 1) is now obsolete, or better said, it's been clarified, so that 2.5 is no longer in the Average range.

I would argue that "Above Average" is still in the "average range". It's not quite good but it's a little better than Average. Hence the half point to indicate that.

 

[ERicJ]

I'm an engineer who failed English...

Ahhh... engineers and message boards: a dangerous combination. Guilty myself.

 

[Olorin]

I'm an engineer who failed English.

Clarification: I only studied Engineering in college, but I've never worked as an engineer. (Actually, I probably took more English classes than any other engineering student at my school.)

 

[sidewinding]

I would argue that "Above Average" is still in the "average range". It's not quite good but it's a little better than Average. Hence the half point to indicate that.

I would argue that 2.5 is actually below the "average range". If you take two reviewers on the oposite end of things like indiana jonesy guy and myself...he has an average course rating of 3.05 while I have an average course rating of 3.01. So technically, a 2.0 is well below average and a 2.50 is even slightly below average. That's where the controversy comes in.

When you guys said "let's pick a number to put the word average beside" why did you choose 2.0?

 

[Greg Layton]

Tim: why don't you create a 2.25 on the scale and label it "THIS IS FREAKING AVERAGE"? Then you can ban everyone from the message board until they go into their reviews and change at least 15% of their course rankings to 2.25. I think this would please everybody. And if it didn't, at least you wouldn't have to hear about it anymore until everyone went in and re-rated their reviews.

Just my two cents.

 

[Olorin]

I would argue that "Above Average" is still in the "average range".

Tim,

Statements like this can be misconstrued and they keep this debate alive.

 

[sidewinding]

It's like saying the bath water is too hot and just right but the thermometer says it's cold.