Oh What a Night

Hi Grant


All it needs is for others to assign votes to a post with biased votes like these ones, and the average star rating will quickly sort itself into something more realistic.


How is the old star system working? I notice most posts don't get rated, so occasionally someone will flag one of note with a four or five star rating...but we virtually never see a one or two star rating. If we do, like in this case, where I assume from the context the voter was intending to give a low score...the effect is actually to make it appear semi-decent because it's better than the zero that most posts rate.

If it was conceived of as less of a 'star rating' and more as a 'score out of 5' (or 10,...and maybe include zero as an option?), would there be more inclination by readers to rate posts? If posts were more widely rated, the averages would mean something...perhaps then it could be possible to search for helpful or worthy posts by their high rating?

Maybe if a score from zero to ten could be assigned each time you rate a post, we could then see the average score, and then when certain averages are achieved, a star could mark it? So an average rating of 9 or above would definitely be a 5 star rating, 7 or 8 could be 4 star...etc...with scores below 3 not earning any stars, for instance.
I'm not attempting to figure out the math involved or the coding that "someone" would have to write, but it would be an interesting aspect to the posts.


Cheers
Craig

[%sig%]