Is that because they're using the same scale as for grading school performance? So, three stars out of five is seen as 60% which is only barely passing, when in

Is that because they're using the same scale as for grading school performance? So, three stars out of five is seen as 60% which is only barely passing, when in fact it should be for average service. Weighting reviews based on the variance in the history of that reviewer seems like a great idea to me, because it gives preference to reviews that probably carry more information in them. A review of five stars from someone who always hands out five star reviews, is meaningless and doesn't inform anyone else of anything. Likewise for one star reviews. In fact, intuitively I think maybe even a five star review from someone who usually hands out one star reviews, or vice versa, isn't very informative either? Reason being that these people clearly don't put a lot of thought into their reviews in the first place.