@paulj said:

@Zeron said:

...since we are seriously considering a change to ratings, then we should also consider letting users have more than 5 options to differentiate shows.

This was brought up a couple of days ago in the Discussion Thread. You are not alone in this belief, and I'll certainly raise that as an issue in my memo to the Admins.

Thank you @paulj and all for a very interesting, nerdy and generally considerate discussion here. I'll echo a few points brought up by others, and provide an example for reference.

RATING SCALE ~ Rotten Tomatoes uses a 5-Star rating system that includes half-stars, effectively making a 10-point scale, allowing for more nuanced ratings. When selecting a rating, RT also provides a broad definition of what each point "means," ie with a 2.5-star rating suggested to be "Not Bad, but Not My Favorite" and 3.5-star rating suggested to mean "Worth a Watch."

These "meanings" may be problematic in data collection (I'm not sure, would love to hear thoughts) and would almost certainly be contentious in the context of Phish show ratings, but for RT I suspect they are at least broad enough to allow for some basic guidance without overly constricting reviewers' ratings. For RT, they also point toward the "value" of ratings being primarily intended to help potential viewers decide whether or not to watch a given movie.

In this Phish context, beyond community consensus of the all-time "best" shows, the "value" of ratings could potentially be construed to be helping fans find quality shows to listen to. However, those two things---"best" and "quality listening"---probably generally correlate, but aren't always the same (ie for highly-theatrical shows whose entertainment value might not be fully represented "on tape").

Regardless of "defining" the scale, I do think a 10-point scale would be better for Phish.net.

RATING TIMING ~ Rotten Tomatoes does not allow audience ratings until after the theatrical release of a film. There may be an additional lag, I'm not sure (and streaming releases complicate things). For Phish.net, I'd suggest a 24-hour delay, from end of show time, before ratings open. You know, sleep on it.

SHOW TRACKING ~ Somewhere over the years, probably in the forums, I've gotten the sense that some fans use ratings to track the shows they've attended (or even just those they've listened to, for the completists out there), which could explain why all ratings from a given user are 5-star (or any other single value). This possible usage pattern may also inform the prospect of implementing a weighted scoring system.

This may simply be convenience, because the "I was there!" button is buried in the "Attendance" tab. Making personal attendance tracking more accessible (perhaps elevating it alongside the ratings input) could ultimately improve the ratings data. Attendance could also be better nuanced as "Engagement" and could include "listened to," "livestreamed," etc, thus expanding individual fans' personal tracking and stats, while also giving more overall site data.

If a weighting system is implemented, I like @jr31105's suggestion of making both weighted and unweighted scores available to users. Cheers!