Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    General Disscussion    These CGEF Ratings... « previous next »
Author Topic: These CGEF Ratings...  (Read 827 times)
Pages: [1] Print
Jarvio

Bending Unit
***
« on: 08-20-2012 13:41 »
« Last Edit on: 08-20-2012 13:43 »

Is it me, or are 1-spammers at work? Every episode of the new season seems to have a lower rating each time I look. And in the reviews section, there are so many 1's..... It's either 1's (which seem like aggressive haters) or 5's (a lot being people who want to make up for the 1's). There are very few 2's, 3's, and 4's....Obviously we all know that the CGEF rating system is flawed anyway because everyone can review an unlimited number of times, but still....

It just saddens me that there are so many aggressive haters to the new futurama... makes me wonder why people can't just lighten up and enjoy the show (or at least, the new season).... We are supposed to be fans. New futurama is no way near as bad as new simpsons, not even close IMO.

So, is it just my paranoia talking, or have other people noticed this too?
x.Bianca.x

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #1 on: 08-20-2012 14:34 »

Maybe they are voting 1 because new Futurama is a piece of shit?
Jarvio

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #2 on: 08-20-2012 14:39 »

Maybe they are voting 1 because new Futurama is a piece of shit?

Well I just don't agree with that
x.Bianca.x

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #3 on: 08-20-2012 14:42 »

Most of them are bad, but I admit there is occasionally a decent episode.
Jarvio

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #4 on: 08-20-2012 14:43 »

IMO all of this season has been really good (except TBJE which I'd say is average/below average) but that's just me
x.Bianca.x

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #5 on: 08-20-2012 14:47 »

Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #6 on: 08-20-2012 14:59 »

I've come to simply not care about the ratings. A 5-point scoring system giving averages in the form of a percentage makes little sense to begin with. And a 3/5 shouldn't be 50%.

But yeah, the only thing CGEF has is a large sample of reviewers. There might be one person going around rating them low, but there isn't really any way of proving that. If it is the case, then I'm sure that proper opinions will balance it over time.
x.Bianca.x

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #7 on: 08-20-2012 15:11 »

"Proper opinions" :P
Svip

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #8 on: 08-20-2012 15:18 »

Bianca, you have never had proper opinions.  Not that Unreal speaks with authority on the matter.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #9 on: 08-20-2012 15:22 »

"Proper opinions" :P
I was talking about a hypothetical scenario. If the low scores are legitimate then I have no problem.

By "proper opinions" I meant "opinions not coming out the rear end of a troll".
Mr Snrub

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #10 on: 08-20-2012 15:26 »
« Last Edit on: 08-20-2012 15:27 »

Somebody (I think TNUK) said on another thread a while ago that a way better way to review episodes would be to be asked what kind of fan you are (nerdy obsessive, casual fan, newcomer, etc.) before submitting a review. That way, you could get a better idea of who liked what episode. I know, for example, that all of the casual fans I've talked to love Attack of the Killer App, but you'd never tell from the reviews. And of course, have it so you can only rate once. You could retract your review and change it, but that's it.

But yeah, the only thing CGEF has is a large sample of reviewers. There might be one person going around rating them low, but there isn't really any way of proving that. If it is the case, then I'm sure that proper opinions will balance it over time.
I think you can tell it's the same guy because he keeps putting his username as his opinion of the episode, eg. FUCKTHSSHOW
Svip

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #11 on: 08-20-2012 15:27 »

Or we could start using my alternative review site!
Boxy Robot

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #12 on: 08-20-2012 15:29 »

Maybe they are voting 1 because new Futurama is a piece of shit?

Well that's just, like, your opinion, man.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #13 on: 08-20-2012 15:31 »

Somebody (I think TNUK) said on another thread a while ago that a way better way to review episodes would be to be asked what kind of fan you are (nerdy obsessive, casual fan, newcomer, etc.) before submitting a review. That way, you could get a better idea of who liked what episode. I know, for example, that all of the casual fans I've talked to love Attack of the Killer App, but you'd never tell from the reviews. And of course, have it so you can only rate once. You could retract your review and change it, but that's it.

But yeah, the only thing CGEF has is a large sample of reviewers. There might be one person going around rating them low, but there isn't really any way of proving that. If it is the case, then I'm sure that proper opinions will balance it over time.
I think you can tell it's the same guy because he keeps putting his username as his opinion of the episode, eg. FUCKTHSSHOW
Speaking of usernames, I saw somebody called "PeelersWorstnightmare".  shifty

Whoever you are, reveal yourself!
SolidSnake

Professor
*
« Reply #14 on: 08-20-2012 16:29 »

Most of them are bad, but I admit there is occasionally a decent episode.
You haven't watched this season, have you?

Anyways, I agree that these CGEF ratings are falling in the toilet. I used to agree with alot of them, but now saying that this season is worse than 6 is just stupid.
DannyJC13

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #15 on: 08-20-2012 17:49 »

Maybe they are voting 1 because new Futurama is a piece of shit?

Kind of like all your posts?
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #16 on: 08-20-2012 19:13 »

Or we could start using my alternative review site!

This is pretty decent, but it has a really intensive review process. The majority of people are lazy, remember. They want to tick boxes. They want to spend three minutes assigning numbers to things. They don't want to use words. They don't want to spend time thinking too deeply or typing to much.

Therefore the user base is small, and people are rarely arsed to write a full review there for new episodes.
Svip

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #17 on: 08-20-2012 22:26 »

And then people should stop whining about the CGEF ratings and start getting interested in these reviews.
totalnerd undercanada

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #18 on: 08-20-2012 22:36 »

And then people should stop whining about the CGEF ratings and start getting interested in these reviews.

Meh. I maintain that my review model would be a lot easier to aggregate meaningful information from.
UnrealLegend

Space Pope
****
« Reply #19 on: 08-26-2013 07:13 »

So, looking at many of the recent reviews on CGEF, it appears that someone is taking the names of PEELers (such as Danny, Beamer, Mr Snrub and myself) and throwing a 1/5 rating on their so-called "reviews". They also seem particularly persistent on the episodes that were generally very well-received, such as "Game of Tones" and "Fun on a Bun".

The episodes that received moderate positivity, such as "Viva Mars Vegas" and "Calculon 2.0" seem to be the ones that end up being the highest-rated (probably because the trolls aren't quite as fussed about it).

Aside from whoever that troll is, I actually agree with most of the average ratings, unlike last years episodes. There's a lot of 80%s, which I think is a somewhat accurate average.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #20 on: 08-26-2013 07:21 »

Yeah, I posted a 5/5 review for Game of Tones on one of the relatively early pages of CGEF and it was later brought to my attention that there was a 1/5 review posted later under my name (which, obviously, wasn't me).

Is there any way to stop this from happening? Registration/one review per IP address/one review per user name/etc?
Box Incorporated

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #21 on: 08-26-2013 07:32 »

Good God the amount of troll votes for Game of Tones is heinous. I'm not sure what's worse, the fact that it's considered worse than Calculon 2.0, or the amount of people with usernames of people here/real versions of people here.
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #22 on: 08-26-2013 07:34 »

It's probably just one or two people trolling. Especially if they're sourcing aliases from PEEL.
Eternium

Professor
*
« Reply #23 on: 08-26-2013 07:53 »

Perhaps mod should be able to remove those troll reviews?
Beamer

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #24 on: 08-26-2013 08:18 »

Even if the reviews are removable, their impacts on the overall scores would probably still stick, though.
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.13 seconds with 17 queries.