View Single Post
Old January 13 2013, 02:16 AM   #45
JWolf
Commodore
 
JWolf's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

Defcon wrote: View Post
There really should have been at least one more option between above average and outstanding, like "Very good" or something like that. There's just a too large gap between those two options IMO.

But I've said that way before Sho started his rating site, and even then I was either ignored or got the "We have always done it this way" routine without a real discussion, so I guess Sho's site is pretty much just the new go-to excuse for something that wouldn't have been changed anyway.

Note: I accept the reasoning now with Sho's site, I just think the system should have been thought through better from the beginning.
I do agree and I think it should have been better thought out. A novel can be better then above average yet not as good as outstanding. That's where the problem lies. Overall, 2012 was very good with some bumps along the way. But overall, better above average and not as good as above average. The following is what I propose we use.

6. Outstanding
5. Very Good
4. Above Average
3. Average
2. Below Average
1. Poor

Christopher wrote: View Post
Maybe people shouldn't worry so much about the names and just treat it as a 1- to 5-star rating system, or an A-B-C-D-F grading scale. Personally I don't see why "above average" and "very good" can't be synonymous or at least overlapping.
Because (IMHO)...

Average = OK
Above Average - Good
Outstanding = Nearly Perfect

There's nothing between Good and Nearly Perfect. It's a big gap.
__________________
Jon
JWolf is offline   Reply With Quote