Ratings Redux
Jan 30 '06
The Bottom Line In which the author tries to clarify (at least for herself) why she rates the way she does.
I've been pretty comfortable for a long time with my personal ratings practices. I'll read a review, decide how helpful I think it is, push the appropriate rating button, and be on my merry way. No muss, no fuss.
If I think there might be some question about the particular rate I leave, I'll usually also write a comment in the specified place for commenting. This not only explains my rating to the reviewer in question, but also gives an explanation of my thought processes to any member coming to the review after me.
Very occasionally, I'll read a review that poses a problem for me when rating. Either the review is 'borderline' between a VH and H or between an H and SH. But sometimes it's because the review falls outside the normal bounds of what I expect from a review. Sometimes it takes a different approach to looking at a product such as a music review that tells a story evoking the feel of an album instead of discussing the album directly; or like an express review of a restaurant that says nothing more than, 'this place closed in 2003.' In both those examples, I think there's information useful to the reader and therefore those reviews earn VH, H or Show ratings on their merit.
Recently, a long-standing member posted a commentary on a book she had not read on the review page for that book. The book in question has recently been exposed as a fraud and the commentary discussed how the books author betrayed the trust of his readership. Normally, if someone hadn't read the book, that would earn an automatic NH from me. In this particular case, though, I thought she made some cogent and salient points about the book and I thought her essay was worth reading. I gave it an OT and asked her to move the review to a more appropriate 'advice' category.
A lot of discussion ensued about the nature of reviews, the helpfulness of the review in question, and the overall expectations from reviewers on the site. And when thinking about the issues arising from this particular review, I began to rethink my OT rating on that review. This whole subject has caused me to reconsider how I rate reviews – not to change my views, but to clarify them. Here's my ratings scale, as I think of it now.
Most Helpful
This is a review that is well thought out, well written, easy to understand, entertaining, and genuinely helpful in terms of making a buying decision. Generally speaking, I won't even consider giving you a MH unless there are at least a couple of other reviews on the same item. The exception is that sometimes a review is so well-written that there is virtually no chance that anyone could possibly do better.
Very Helpful
This is a review that I think gives all the information necessary to make a buying decision on a product. It contains a balance of product description and personal experience.
Helpful
This review gives me information that would be useful in making a decision about a product, but that doesn't give me complete information about the product. I probably wouldn't make a buying decision based solely on a Helpful review.
This is the minimum rating I will give to a review that I think should be seen by the public.
Somewhat Helpful
This review falls short of giving me any information that would be useful for making a buying decision about a product. It may contain factual errors, or it may come off as more of a rant than a review.
This is the maximum rating I will give to a review that I think should not be seen by the public.
Not Helpful
This review violates the terms of service for the site. It may be plagiarized, intentionally offensive, or contain personal attacks on another member.
Off Topic
The off topic review might qualify for any of the other ratings except for the fact that it is posted in the wrong place.
____________________________________
I'd be more than happy to discuss my ratings practices with anyone who asks. You can also see my previous essay on the subject here. As I said, this essay doesn't replace that one; it is merely to clarify some of my thoughts.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
pearannoyed
|
 - Top 1000 |
|
Member: Amy Padgett
Location: CA Dreamin' ~ TX reality
Reviews written: 197
Trusted by: 242 members
About Me:
Mean people suck.
|
|
|
© 1999-2010 Shopping.com, Inc.