Amount of votes should affects! - Suggestions

Jabapac

Gender: Male
Age: 36

Quote:

A high rated album (mean 90%) with 100 ratings:
(100 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 76 = 89%

But the 100 ratings aren't that high on BEA:
(100 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 76 = 89%
(500 ÷ (500 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (500 + 10)) × 76 = 90%
(1000 ÷ (1000 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (1000 + 10)) × 76 = 90%

So, for the 100 ratings Vs. (whatever a big number was) of ratings.. there will always be only "1" number in difference: 89% to 90%

And don't forget it was with the average of 90, which is far away from the AV: 76. so with closer averages to the AV even the less the differences that will gonna be produced.

But with the AV of 50:

Quote:

(100 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 50 = 86%

(100 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (100 + 10)) × 50 = 86%
(500 ÷ (500 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (500 + 10)) × 50 = 89%
(1000 ÷ (1000 + 10)) × 90 + (10 ÷ (1000 + 10)) × 50 = 90%

Now we got "4" numbers in difference: from 86% to 90%

Quote:

Plugging a lower value of AV lowers the average rating of items that haven't been rated very much

5 ratings aren't enough to represent any item's value at all, I believe. not even 10 ratings.

Quote:

but it's also slightly misleading because AV is not derived from the data on the site

If could be able to be changed for example to MR: Middle Range, which equals 50 in our rating system.

Quote:

& the average ends up much lower than the mean.

50 is fair for both the highly rated & the lowly rated.

Quote:

People with charts might not like their average to be much lower than it really is

In case they got few ratings it doesn't proof anything already.. whatever the AV was 80 or 50 or any number.

albummaster
Janitor

Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin

I understand what you are saying, but the way things are now is smoother, and I don't think the number of ratings should affect the average in a significant way once they go over a certain point (100 votes at 90 or 1,000 votes at 90 *should* end up at roughly the same average as enough votes have been cast to get a consensus). I agree that ten ratings isn't very much, but it's enough to get a broad idea. Maybe the answer isn't to change AV, but instead to increase the value of n.

Jabapac

Gender: Male
Age: 36

albummaster wrote:

Maybe the answer isn't to change AV, but instead to increase the value of n.

Yeah, I was thinking of this as an alternative solution, even it's not as much as what I'm hoping for, but it's really fine.
So please let me suggest it that way:
The biggest number of ratings for an item /100.
For now, that item is "OK Computer" with 1524 ratings, lets say 1500. 1500/100=15. so the "m"=15, and so on. what do you think? .. It's just a way to determine the value of "m".

Jabapac

Gender: Male
Age: 36

What do you think of my last reply?

albummaster
Janitor

Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin

Jabapac wrote:

Yeah, I was thinking of this as an alternative solution, even it's not as much as what I'm hoping for, but it's really fine.
So please let me suggest it that way:
The biggest number of ratings for an item /100.
For now, that item is "OK Computer" with 1524 ratings, lets say 1500. 1500/100=15. so the "m"=15, and so on. what do you think? .. It's just a way to determine the value of "m".

m (yes, not n - sorry) needs to be high enough to make a bit of a difference, but low enough that enough items are included in the top-rated charts. I think it also needs to stay as a round number (base 10) to make it tidier, so I'd be inclined to round to the nearest base 10 figure (which is 20).

I think as well, rather than being dependent on just one item, it should be based on the average number of ratings that the top ten rated items have received to make it more tamper proof (& more stable). If 'm' becomes 1% of the ratings that the top ten rated items have obtained, it would become 1% of 1,214 (which is 12, or 10 when rounded). To make this idea work (I'm not against it), we could base this on 2% to make 24 (or 20 when rounded). All items would then need twenty ratings to qualify for a top-rated chart.

Jabapac

Gender: Male
Age: 36

albummaster wrote:

m (yes, not n - sorry) needs to be high enough to make a bit of a difference, but low enough that enough items are included in the top-rated charts. I think it also needs to stay as a round number (base 10) to make it tidier, so I'd be inclined to round to the nearest base 10 figure (which is 20).

I think as well, rather than being dependent on just one item, it should be based on the average number of ratings that the top ten rated items have received to make it more tamper proof (& more stable). If 'm' becomes 1% of the ratings that the top ten rated items have obtained, it would become 1% of 1,214 (which is 12, or 10 when rounded). To make this idea work (I'm not against it), we could base this on 2% to make 24 (or 20 when rounded). All items would then need twenty ratings to qualify for a top-rated chart.

Good idea, but might has sometimes an album with a very low number of ratings on the top 10. it's you decide after all!

albummaster
Janitor

Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin

the only issue with doing this is that charts don't seem to get as many ratings as albums or tracks, and so the list of top-rated charts would be most affected by this change. 764 charts have more than 10 ratings, but only 353 charts have more than 20 ratings (which reduces the length of the list quite a bit). I think generally people are a bit afraid to rate charts because they are so personal.

Jabapac

Gender: Male
Age: 36

albummaster wrote:

the only issue with doing this is that charts don't seem to get as many ratings as albums or tracks, and so the list of top-rated charts would be most affected by this change. 764 charts have more than 10 ratings, but only 353 charts have more than 20 ratings (which reduces the length of the list quite a bit). I think generally people are a bit afraid to rate charts because they are so personal.

Mmm.. but still there the option of choosing a minimum number of ratings (1 to 25).

albummaster
Janitor

Gender: Male
Location: Spain
Site Admin

good point. I'll add this to the list for early 2013.

Jabapac

Gender: Male
Age: 36

albummaster wrote:

good point. I'll add this to the list for early 2013.

Sorry, but do you mean that option (because it's already exists), or to increase the "m" into 20?