3 ms·
This is a worthwhile analysis - interesting to see the graphs and breakdown along different angles. But I don't see the "big flaw" exposed. You've democratize
by Isamu 9y ago
This is a worthwhile analysis - interesting to see the graphs and breakdown along different angles.
But I don't see the "big flaw" exposed. You've democratized movie rating and got an accurate reflection of the polarized feelings on the topic. Are you arguing people should be "objective"? Are they objective about any movie?
People voting before really seeing the movie - a problem yes, but the outcome wouldn't change much. And it is an implementation problem, not a problem with online rating per se.
- favorited 9y agoThe "big flaw" is that a film that people either love or hate is indistinguishable from a film that everyone thinks is OK.
- Isamu 9y agoSo on Amazon page we see the distribution in addition to the average score. People clearly either love it or hate it. https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Al-Gore/dp/B00AB0SHRW https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Al-Gore/dp/B00AB0S... Plus it skews toward the positive, since we would expect a verified buyer is more likely to be someone that already approves. On the other hand, films that everyone thinks are OK are still indistinguishable from a film I may either love or hate. This is not a flaw, but inherent in the idea of ratings itself. I don't see bimodal distributions as a problem, but hiding them might be.