Re: People who only 5 star review should be banned or not allowed to review

#41
Aapjuh Wrote: Did you ever race(running) a kid and held back to be nice, did you then show them reality after the Xth time racing, did you see them cross their arms and pout, did they ever ask to race again? if not, can you not easily image this scene happening?
Being nice isn't always good, i'm not saying you should be mean but reality can hurt regardless.
The current ongoings are with the star system is trash for both sides (authors and readers).
Except, 99 % of readers are that kid. 

Rest are the ten biggest ones always on the top.

Actually, I don't think the "runner" analogy is even the correct one - "race" here isn't about "being first" it is about "being noticed". 

Because race is about winning, being first, but writing is about being noticed. For amateur writers, it mostly doesn't matter if they aren't the best writer in the world, they just want to be seen. They like positive feedback, yes, but it doesn't automatically translate to being number 1. Except, on Royal Road, you constantly struggle to be number one, not to win, but to be merely seen. Only the best are seen. 


It's absolutely necessary for your story to have top stats to even be noticed by people who would potentially want to read it. But to be noticed by the vast majority of readers you already have to be successful and have all those readers in the first place. Visibility is a success, and success is visibility. It's catch-22 scenario. 


That's why there are so many downvotes. People are trying to sway the system so they have the chance to be seen, they know it hurts, and that's why it is done. A story under 4 practically doesn't exist. 

Imagine there is a story, you came and give the story 0.5 to give the "kid on the racetrack" a lesson about how useless he is. Well, that story is dead, best delete it and start anew since it needs around two 5 stars to even exist and be potentially read by the people who want to read it. 

A low rating doesn't say anything about the story being bad. A low rating is "I want to delete this story" 

In the kid analogy, you aren't winning against the scrawny kid, you are breaking the legs of the kid who lost so he can never run again.

Re: People who only 5 star review should be banned or not allowed to review

#42
Aapjuh - nope I never slowed down to be nice when running. I won a few races but mostly came second or third. Good but not the best. Only first place got noticed by the crowd. All the rest of us became was fuel for their glory. 

Lucky for me I liked sprinting. No matter how twisted the competion and values of those who had organised the event. 

Beast_regard - I agree wholeheartedly. I know I have no one irl who cares about this hobby of mine (not malice just indifference to something they don't understand). On RR, however, with a little effort on the forums, you can get noticed by a few likeminded folk and interact with peers.

Re: People who only 5 star review should be banned or not allowed to review

#43
beast_regards Wrote:
Aapjuh Wrote: *snip*
*Snip*
Read 2 posts up for context

The racing example was about you (adult) vs kid (4-7) and no actual organized race just you and your kid/nephew/niece/neighbor.
Doesn't have to be a race, any game you let a little kid win and them going on to challenge others based on false confidence, false strategy and having it shattered.
Either way, reading both you and tea all i get from it is how bad the system is.

You'd need an existing fanbase to upvote you regardless of your story being good or bad, or a horde of trolls downvoting regardless of their story being good or bad to drop them below you.

If the story doesn't matter in regards to the rating system then the rating system is broken.

Re: People who only 5 star review should be banned or not allowed to review

#44
Aapjuh... you're not pointing out a flaw with this rating system. You're pointing out that product quality (in this case, our stories) and the marketing of those products aren't fully dependent on one another. This is a simple observable fact and recognizable in all forms of discovery. The rating system isn't broken. It's a reflection of reality. Changing to a statistical model won't change that. That just introduces the possibilities of a different kind of gamesmanship than what's currently in place.

It comes down to this: the quality of a story is only one part of the equation when it comes to visibility/discoverability. The rest is all of the other marketing things... cover art, description, good old-fashioned self-promotion, and--yes--ratings/reviews. The last of those is the only thing that's not fully under our control so it becomes the scapegoat that everyone points at... the thing we blame when we're not getting the results we want (or the magical answer when we are getting the results we want).

Any system can be gamed. At least with reviews there's a qualitative component to go with the quantitative rating, so it's not just about the numbers. 

Re: People who only 5 star review should be banned or not allowed to review

#45
Aapjuh Wrote: The racing example was about you (adult) vs kid (4-7) and no actual organized race just you and your kid/nephew/niece/neighbor.
Doesn't have to be a race, any game you let a little kid win and them going on to challenge others based on false confidence, false strategy and having it shattered.
Either way, reading both you and tea all i get from it is how bad the system is.

You'd need an existing fanbase to upvote you regardless of your story being good or bad, or a horde of trolls downvoting regardless of their story being good or bad to drop them below you.

If the story doesn't matter in regards to the rating system then the rating system is broken.

Except, in that race with the neighbourhood kid scenario, it is the lose-lose condition 

You let the kid win, you create false expectations. 
If a kid loses, you basically reinforce that the world is unfair, and any underhanded strategy is thus valid. I.e. in the Royal Road scenario, 5-star and 0.5-star bombs are valid tactics, because there is no fair way of winning anyway and you have to cheat because the system was set against you. 
Because that happened to the kid. The system was set up against him in the first place, he has never had the chance to win.
If cheats don't help, then the only winning move is not to play.