|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Ratings calculation |
| 1-20 of 20 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 04-16-17 04:48am - 2767 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User  Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
Ratings calculation Can someone explain how overall review ratings are calculated? It seems simple enough and maybe I'm dense. Japan HDV has an overall PU rating of 90.3. However, the rating from one active review is 88 (mine) and the TBP rating is 80. Apparently, there's another factor I'm missing for this to make sense. | |
|
||
| 04-16-17 11:38am - 2767 days | #2 | |
|
bibo (0)
Suspended Posts: 179 Registered: Sep 16, '10 Location: GER |
There is another rating by user artnoir who rated the site 95. It's not a review though, just a rating. Whatever that is. https://www.pornusers.com/site_log.html?id=27851 | |
|
||
| 04-16-17 01:40pm - 2767 days | #3 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
PU and TBP ratings are separate. The PU rating is the average score from all reviews posted withing the last 2 years (expired reviews don't count towards a PU score). TBP does their own thing which tends to trend more towards what other review sites score. | |
|
||
| 04-16-17 02:12pm - 2767 days | #4 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
Ah, I see how they do the math. However, I don't get what a "rating" is. How do you give a site a rating without a review? Seems fishy to me. -) | |
|
||
| 04-16-17 05:15pm - 2767 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I THINK YOU ARE OVER-THINKING THE PROCESS (AND THE SITE). THE SITE OWNERS (I'M TALKING ABOUT PU) WERE TRYING TO MAKE A FRIENDLY, EASY TO USE SITE WHERE MEMBERS COULD POST THEIR REVIEWS, COMMENTS, ETC. SO, IF A MEMBER DID NOT WANT TO SPEND THE TIME TO WRITE A REVIEW OF A SITE, HE COULD STILL POST HIS OPINION (SCORE/RATING/WHAT-EVER-YOU-CALL-IT) OF THE SITE WITH A RATING/SCORE. I'VE NEVER GIVEN A SITE A SCORE WITHOUT GIVING IT A REVIEW. BUT SOME PEOPLE HAVE. THEY PROBABLY THINK THEY ARE MAKING A WORTHWHILE CONTRIBUTION TO THE SITE INFORMATION. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. JUST MY 2 CENTS. PS: I'M WRITING IN CAPS, BECAUSE IT'S EASIER FOR ME TO SEE AND WRITE AND EDIT. NOT TRYING TO SHOUT OR BE RUDE. PPS: FROM A PU RATING'S PAGE: Rating Info 1. Ratings are weighted at 50% compared to a full review (toward the site's score). 2. Ratings expire after 12 months from it's creation date. New rating can be made after expiration. 3. Ratings can be edited or upgraded to full review anytime. Edited on Apr 16, 2017, 05:25pm | |
|
||
| 04-16-17 05:21pm - 2767 days | #6 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
I'm an accountant  | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 10:35am - 2765 days | #7 | |
|
Will P
PornUsers Staff Posts: 5 Registered: Jan 25, '16 Location: United States |
I don't know if I think that it's "fishy" for people to rate sites without writing reviews, after all, the same thing happens on online shopping sites. It's more that I like be given enough details about why someone likes or dislikes something before I decide whether to join or not. Sometimes when you read someone site review, you realize that it comes down to something very subjective - like they didn't feel the site had enough green-eyed blondes named April. And hey, the heart wants what the heart wants or maybe it's not the heart, but another body part. However, that particular need or desire might not be a deciding factor for whether someone else will want to join a site. | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 12:30pm - 2765 days | #8 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I AGREE THAT A SCORE CAN BE VERY SUBJECTIVE. EVEN WHEN PEOPLE BELIEVE THEY ARE USING A STRICT OBJECTIVE SCORING SYSTEM TO RATE A SITE, I STILL BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A STRONG, SUBJECTIVE ELEMENT IN THE FINAL SCORE. IF YOU READ ENOUGH REVIEWS OF A POPULAR MOVIE, YOU WILL COME TO UNDERSTAND THE SUBJECTIVE NATURE OF MOST REVIEWS/SCORES. THE SAME MOVIE CAN BE CALLED A CLASSIC, OR A PIECE OF JUNK. MANY MOVIES THAT ARE NOW CONSIDERED CLASSICS WERE CONSIDERED BOMBS (FAILURES) AT THE TIME THEY WERE ORIGINALLY RELEASED. BOTH COMMERCIAL FAILURES AND CRITICAL FAILURES. | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 01:11pm - 2765 days | #9 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
Still having problems posting. This may be a duplicate. Will, perhaps "fishy" was the wrong word. As you went on to explain or at least intimate, the details in the review are generally more important than the rating. Giving a score to a site is meaningless to me without a narrative about what the site is about as well as how the reviewer arrived at the given score. Btw, I have no idea how to go about simply leaving a rating. But that's okay. Unless it's gonna make me eligible for the raffle -)). Having said that, I would substitute "inappropriate" for "fishy." I don't think your comparison to online shopping sites is fair, though I'm not familiar with any sites that are simply given a numerical rating. I've never seen mainstream movie ratings without reviews. And I read movie reviews often as I go on average to one movie per week. But whatever, I think the point comes across on PU one way or the other and I'm generally able to discern whether to subscribe to a site by its reviews. However, sometimes I have to enhance the review with my own research if the review is lacking. | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 03:27pm - 2765 days | #10 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I think the score is fishy when it varies significantly from the other scores. The only time I don't necessarily think it's fishy is if there is a review where you can see the thinking behind the score. Now some scores are based far too much on the bad personal experience of the reviewer rather than as a pure analysis of the site's content. That score will affect the overall rating of the site but with a review to accompany it than you are able to identify the reasons behind the score and make a better judgement. The same couldn't be said if the person only posted the score. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 03:42pm - 2765 days | #11 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
I totally agree. And I'll take your statement a step further by saying that regardless of personal opinion, subjectivity should have little to do with a rating. For example: 1. I thought the site sucked but that's just me. I hate sites that specialize in long blow jobs. 2. I thought the site was fantastic despite the horrible video quality, cross checks and lack of support. In either case, the rating should not be based on the reviewer's personal preferences. This may be a matter of contention, but I truly believe a good reviewer will be able to separate personal biases from the review and ultimate rating. | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 05:05pm - 2765 days | #12 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
"I thought the site was fantastic despite the horrible video quality, cross checks and lack of support." ARE YOU SAYING THAT HORRIBLE VIDEO QUALITY, CROSS CHECKS AND LACK OF SUPPORT ARE PERSONAL BIASES THAT SHOULD BE IGNORED? OR THAT THEY ARE VALID FACTS THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THE REVIEW? OR MAYBE YOU ARE SAYING THERE ARE FANTASTIC SITES THAT HAVE BLEMISHES.  | |
|
||
| 04-18-17 05:16pm - 2765 days | #13 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
Sorry, didn't explain it properly I guess. The point was, even if the reviewer loved the site, he should take into consideration all the facts. Same as the other example. | |
|
||
| 04-21-17 06:07pm - 2762 days | #14 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Thanks for the explanation. And for your patience. I couldn't understand what your point was, and my brain got into a loop. Maybe I'm getting anal in my old age. I need to let go of things more easily.   | |
|
||
| 04-21-17 06:35pm - 2762 days | #15 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
The first thing I would think of if I read that someone thought that a site was fantastic but the video quality is horrible would be that this person is either trolling us or should step away from the bong because he clearly not in a proper state of mind to review a site. There is no way that you can have the word horrible and fantastic in the same review. I'd be more inclined to believe that there is a certain level of personal bias if there is mention of cross sell and lack of support issues. The first because the person probably got conned into buying something he or she had not planed to do and the second because some people get pissed quite fast if they lose access to their site for a day or two. It's happened to me a couple of times and it's a little annoying but not something I bother mentioning in my review. Especially if it happens once and then everything is great afterwards. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 04-21-17 07:32pm - 2762 days | #16 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
MY THINKING WAS: HOW CAN A SITE BE CONSIDERED FANTASTIC, IF THE SITE PROBLEMS ARE HORRIBLE VIDEO QUALITY, CROSS CHECKS AND LACK OF SUPPORT? WHAT IF A SITE HAS ONE OR TWO FANTASIC-LOOKING MODELS, AND SOME REALLY GREAT, HOT VIDEOS THAT ABSOLUTELY BLOW YOU AWAY? IN THE REAL WORLD, I HAVEN'T BEEN THAT LUCKY. THERE ARE SITES WITH GREAT LOOKING MODELS. AND SITES WITH SOME INTENSELY HOT SEX ON FIRST VIEWING. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY FANTASTIC SITES OUT THERE. THERE ARE PLENTY OF NICE OR GOOD SITES. THAT ARE WORTH YOUR MONEY. BUT MAYBE A FANTASTIC SITE IS THE EQUIVALENT OF THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM. OR A SITE THAT ABSOLUTELY DESERVES A SCORE OF 100. IN REALITY, THE THRILL OF THE HUNT IS A LARGE PART OF THE COLLECTOR'S PASSION. BECAUSE ONCE YOU GET IT, THE ITEM'S VALUE SEEMS TO DROP OVER TIME. SAD BUT TRUE, I THINK. | |
|
||
| 04-22-17 03:51am - 2761 days | #17 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
Yes! We digress, but very appropriate timing for me. I grew tired of mainstream sites long ago, i.e., Brazzers, Skeet, etc. etc. I live for the hunt, mostly. Unfortunately, the pickings are slim and the results are generally awful not to mention it burning a hole in my wallet. But when I find that needle in the haystack, it seems to make it all worthwhile. | |
|
||
| 05-30-17 06:50am - 2723 days | #18 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User  Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
When I write a review, which I do occasionally, I generally have a range in mind when I start. I don't give the score initially. I write the pro's and con's, then give as detailed a review as I can. I usually have the site open and look around as I write. I look at a few downloads too. After I'm done writing, I compare my impressions after writing the review to the range I had estimated. The very last thing I do is give a numerical score for the site. Part of scoring for me is comparing how well the site compares with other sites that share the same niche. Part is how good the technical aspects of the website and photo/video quality is. Part is how satisfied with the site I am. There's a little guideline PU provides for reviewers to base scoring on, but pegging a number within those guidelines can be the hardest part of a review. But usually the final number is very close to my initial gut feeling, but I do modify it as I rack up the pro's, con's, and body of the review. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." Edited on May 30, 2017, 06:55am | |
|
||
| 05-30-17 07:05am - 2723 days | #19 | |
|
jook (0)
Active User Posts: 325 Registered: Dec 22, '13 Location: jersey city |
Hey Loki, it seems as if you've emerged from a long hiatus. -) The question was meant in a different context and answered by wittyguy. However, as long as you bring up the subject, my rating system is not entirely different from yours. I also write my review first before arriving at a decision what number to give it. This is the least important aspect of the review for me. I do have a few caveats, a departure from the past. It is rare that I will go to either extreme, under 55 or over 95. A site has to do pretty much everything wrong or right for me to go to an extreme. I also try to be objective and not let personal feelings about content influence my rating. | |
|
||
| 05-30-17 08:21pm - 2723 days | #20 | |
|
Loki (0)
Active User Posts: 395 Registered: Jun 13, '07 Location: California |
Yeah, had more free time recently. Sorry to be redundant with my reply. I read the thread, but didn't catch that Wittyguy had nailed the issue. Sorry. "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself." | |
|
||
| 1-20 of 20 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
