RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,692
Posts: 5,213,381
Members: 24,207
Currently online: 838
Newest member: Stevie Trek


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Literature

Trek Literature "...Good words. That's where ideas begin."

View Poll Results: Rate 2012 in Trek lit
Outstanding 11 22.92%
Above average 30 62.50%
Average 5 10.42%
Below average 1 2.08%
Poor 1 2.08%
Voters: 48. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 7 2013, 02:33 AM   #16
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

Hey, I just nicked Sho's rating system! I thought you guys would appreciate consistency in your poll options
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 02:50 PM   #17
JWolf
Commodore
 
JWolf's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

How about this...

I propose a 10 star rating system that we can use to rate the books. It give a lot more flexibility.
__________________
Jon
JWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 04:12 PM   #18
Thrawn
Rear Admiral
 
Thrawn's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

I think that ship has sailed. Sho has such a comprehensive list of all of these rated on the same scale; changing the scale would invalidate comparisons for years.
__________________
The Almighty Star Trek Lit-Verse Reading Order Flowchart - be confused no longer about what to read next, or what to read first.
Thrawn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 05:02 PM   #19
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

Besides, ratings are subjective in the first place; different people would have different definitions of what constitutes a 6-star or 8-star rating. Subdividing it further would add more options, but it wouldn't really increase the accuracy. It can be misleading to use more precision than is applicable to the thing being measured. And opinions are very imprecise things.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 1/21/14 including non-spoiler discussion for Rise of the Federation Book 2

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 05:34 PM   #20
Deranged Nasat
Vice Admiral
 
Deranged Nasat's Avatar
 
Location: Within my own Magic Murder Bag
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

Given that my overall opinion on Trek lit is highly positive, I'm very reluctant to give out "Excellent" ratings. In my personal ranking system, Average pretty much means "good", Below Average means "acceptable but somewhat disappointing", and Above Average means "a favourite". In practice, then, I often rate books lower than the average respondent despite being very enthusiastic about the general quality.
__________________
We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile and nothing can grow there; too much, the best of us is washed away.
Deranged Nasat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 10:34 PM   #21
JWolf
Commodore
 
JWolf's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

Thrawn wrote: View Post
I think that ship has sailed. Sho has such a comprehensive list of all of these rated on the same scale; changing the scale would invalidate comparisons for years.
I'm not worried about that. I just want to properly rate things and I cannot when the scale is too small.
__________________
Jon
JWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 10:37 PM   #22
JWolf
Commodore
 
JWolf's Avatar
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

Outstanding
Better then Above Average
Above average
Average
Below average
Not quite Poor
Poor

I think that would do. But the wording for the extra two options may be tweaked to sound better. Think of the two extra options as 1/2 stars.
__________________
Jon
JWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 11:24 PM   #23
Lee Son of Pete
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
View Lee Son of Pete's Twitter Profile
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

How about:

1. So good it made me do a sex-wee
2. Absolutely outstanding beyond belief
3. Outstanding
4. Better than good but not quite outstanding
5. Good
6. Better than above avererge but not quite good, unless you are overly fond of Trek Lit in which case class this as good
7. Above Average
8. Redshirt
9. Slightly below average
10. Below Decks
11. Worse than Below average but not quite poor
12. Poor
13. Truely awful, so bad it made me violently ill
14. Worse than a Neelix special
Lee Son of Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 08:58 PM   #24
ronny
Fleet Captain
 
ronny's Avatar
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
View ronny's Twitter Profile
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

I'm used to the 5 tier system because of the way the home town newspaper, sfgate.com, reviews things. There's no 3.5 stars or what ever, it's one of 5 pictures:

outstanding - the little guy leaping out of his chair
above average - the little guy sitting up and clapping
average - the little guy sitting up paying attention
below average - the little guy asleep in his chair
poor - an empty chair

There's no "above poor" where the guy is about to get out of his chair.

Adding "above above average" or what ever really isn't going to change anything. For example, when 90% of the votes for a David Mack book are Outstanding or Above Average, that's all I need to know. It doesn't matter to me if 90% of the votes are scattered across the top 2 categories or the top 3 of an expanded list of options. And what Thrawn says is 100% true, I'm really not interested in having the ratings chart thrown out just so we can start over with a larger set to choose from.
__________________
If you want people to respect your ideas, get better ideas. - John Scalzi
ronny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 09:17 PM   #25
zarkon
Captain
 
zarkon's Avatar
 
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

/5 is the best system. below average/above average are fairly dry identifiers, but the scale is pretty much perfect.
__________________
In defeat, malice. In victory, revenge.
zarkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 09:35 PM   #26
Deranged Nasat
Vice Admiral
 
Deranged Nasat's Avatar
 
Location: Within my own Magic Murder Bag
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

I propose the following 13 categories:

1. *Perfection*

2. Outstanding

3. Better Than Above Average But Not As Good As Outstanding

4. Above Average

5. Better Than A Bit Better Than Average But Worse Than Above Average

6. A Bit Better Than Average Because There Was A Funny Joke About Andorian Mating Customs And/or A Small Appearance By A Minor Character I Like.

7. Average

8. Better Than Less Than Average but Worse than Average

9. Less Than Average

10. Better Than Worse Than Less Than Average but Worse Than Less Than Average

11. Worse Than Less Than Average

12. Better Than Poor But Worse Than Worse Than Less Than Average

13. Poor

__________________
We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile and nothing can grow there; too much, the best of us is washed away.
Deranged Nasat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 02:07 AM   #27
JD
Admiral
 
JD's Avatar
 
Location: Arizona, USA
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

I'm confused.
__________________
Over the course of many encounters and many years, I have successfully developed a standard operating procedure for dealing with big, nasty monsters. Run away. Me and Monty Python.
Harry Dresden - Blood Rites (The Dresden Files #6)
JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 12:55 PM   #28
Defcon
Rear Admiral
 
Defcon's Avatar
 
Location: Germany
View Defcon's Twitter Profile
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

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.
Defcon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 02:29 PM   #29
Hugh Cambridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

The choice in 5 notes seems good to me but the naming is perhaps no so accurate.
Why not:
5/ Outstanding
4/ Very Good
3/ Average
2/ So so
1/ Poor
Hugh Cambridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 04:34 PM   #30
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Rate 2012 in Trek lit

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.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 1/21/14 including non-spoiler discussion for Rise of the Federation Book 2

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.