No rating?
An interesting omission...
______
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
STILL no rating?
Am I the only one who find this strange?
______
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
I see a rating when I click on the page. Don't know why you don't. But I have seen that happen before.
shareOK, I got curious. But since this is listed as a SERIES, I checked and see "night one" has a rating. Night two does not, and the series overall apparently does not.
I thought it strange, too, since I have viewed with different devices and never saw a rating. Not until I viewed "night one" as a single episode.
______
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
This http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3656138/reference is series overall page I come up with, and I see a rating at the top.
shareI see one with that link, too, but not just clicking on the title. Apparently the "reference" folder at the end makes the difference. But why it doesn't appear, normally, like nearly all other titles, I don't know.
Interesting about the ratings, though... a great deal of people either voted 1 or 10. It's hard to take either extreme seriously. Especially 10.
______
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
I got to that page by clicking on The Dovekeepers at the top of the forum page that lists all the threads.
Interesting about the ratings, though... a great deal of people either voted 1 or 10.
I wonder what it would be if you took out all of the 1 and 10 votes. There are other factors involved besides just the votes that are used to calculate the ratings. Message board activity is suspected as being one of those factors. If so its rather ironic that those serial posters of "worst movie I ever saw" are actually helping the rating. LOL share
I wonder what it would be if you took out all of the 1 and 10 votes.
There are rating systems where the high and low votes get thrown out automatically.
Were I to create a system for IMDb I would probably weight the 1s and 10s relatively lowly, knowing that most are knee-jerk votes trying to offset the others. A show like this may have disappointed a lot of people, but 1? Seriously. There are no made-for-tv movies they consider any worse? Same with the 10 and the best.
There are other factors involved besides just the votes that are used to calculate the ratings. Message board activity is suspected as being one of those factors.
Hmm. But how would that affect the vote? Do they make it higher as a result? That would make little sense. Sometimes people are active on a board to talk about how surprisingly bad it was. The ones with the least board activity are likely the ones decidedly mediocre.
Now, a "relevancy" rating might be in order as something separate from a quality rating. Message board activity would be one of the main factors in that.
______
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan share
Yes, I think that message board activity could be factored in for the total rating. Its true that some people do come to post their displeasure lets not forget that web site traffic is one way Google ranks a page. IMDB could be taking a cue from them. And if that IS the case, then the complainers are actually helping shows they hate.
shareBut a "rating" and a "ranking" are two different things.
Yes, google makes sense to rank a heavily trafficked site higher. But a RATING is supposed to be about opinions re quality, not a ranking of popularity / relevancy.
______
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Yes, the rating. The thing that is determined by voting, and possibly other factors as well.
share