Welcome GUEST!      CREATE ACCOUNT - Forgot Password?

Create an account to share your experiences and more!

E-MAIL   PASS  

Auto Log-in Future Sessions (on this computer).
User Comment A note about the site and any replies from other users.

Visit The Training Of O

The Training Of O (2)

asmith12 (124) 09-24-08  04:10pm
Rookie Badge  Talk Back  Comments  Pollster  Top Monthly User  Hardcore Badge  Trusted User  Male Profile TRUST USER?   YES (53), NO (0)

Rating calculation problem?

PU says that rating for TheTrainingOfO is 94, but there are only 2 reviews, one is 95, and another is 90, so I expect it to be 92.5. Ok, I know that there are ratings and so on, so I went to "Feedback History" and found that's it's 92.5 there. So it's 94 on site page, and 92.5 in "Feedback History". Not that it really matters much, but which one is correct?

Reply To Comment

Comment Replies (11)

Replies to the user comment above.

Msg # User Message Date

1

elonlybuster (39) It's most likely from the users who just do the rating without posting a comment or review.
09-24-08  05:54pm

Reply To Message

2

badandy400 (103) A few weeks ago PU staff sent use a newsletter. The newsletter explained that as a review gets older it becomes less of an impact on the scoring of a site. So if a review was a year old it would not be weighted the same as a review that was three days old.

The point is that an old review may still hold some merit, but the newer review would be much more trustworthy (assuming all else equal) than the older one simply because the older one can not account for any changes over the last year or whatever.

This change was made at the same time as they began to allow us to update reviews. Which is nice because many of us like to revisit sites every six months or whatever. Now we can keep everything a little more up to date.

It was a good catch, so this proves that you are at least half paying attention. You can read about these changes on the bottom of the homepage in the news section. I believe it is the most current newsletter.

09-24-08  06:17pm

Reply To Message

3

asmith12 (124) REPLY TO #2 - badandy400 :

I've read that, but shouldn't it also be reflected on "Feedback History" page? Click on "Feedback History" link - it shows very detailed calculation (obviously aiming to explain how the rating was calculated), but end-result is DIFFERENT from the rating shown on the main page.
09-25-08  04:19am

Reply To Message

4

badandy400 (103) REPLY TO #3 - asmith12 :

This is something that perhaps you should talk to Khan about. The one review was a year old and thus does not count as much toward the final score. You are correct though, the feedback history page is not showing everything.

Here it is:

The old review is a year old, thus it counts as 25%
The newer review counts as 100% still

Newer review score times 4 plus the older review score and divide all by 5 since there is five parts to the score. Much like calculating a students GPA

95*4+90=470
470/5=94 ---the displayed score

I hope this helps a bit. They do need a line on the feedback page to count the number of older reviews.

09-25-08  10:37am

Reply To Message

5

asmith12 (124) REPLY TO #4 - badandy400 :

Thanks for explanation; as for talking to Khan - he reads it anyway (to approve), so if he agrees it's a problem, he will probably fix it sooner or later.
09-25-08  11:40am

Reply To Message

6

Khan
PU Staff
REPLY TO #5 - asmith12 :

As mentioned, there are several factors that go into the score. I have asked the tech guy to look at it as to why the score isn't the same on both pages. My guess is, one page is using the new system and one is still using the old weighting of scores. But that's a guess. He'll be able to tell if it's a glitch and fix whatever is needed.

Thx for the heads up.

09-25-08  12:28pm

Reply To Message

7

asmith12 (124) REPLY TO #6 - Khan :

Sure, no problem, I just was a bit confused about different numbers on different pages :-).
09-25-08  01:22pm

Reply To Message

8

badandy400 (103) REPLY TO #5 - asmith12 :

I do not usually look to much at the scores. I feel that at times they are weighed one way or another too much by people who are biased either direction.

Hopefully he sees his name and says "hey thats me!" I guess it really is not a big deal though, I did not even know the feedback history page was there until you mentioned it.

Anyway, glad I could make it make sense for you.

09-25-08  02:33pm

Reply To Message

9

asmith12 (124) REPLY TO #8 - badandy400 :

Sure it isn't a big deal, but as a perfectionist I prefer everything to be in order :-).
09-25-08  02:42pm

Reply To Message

10

badandy400 (103) REPLY TO #9 - asmith12 :

Haha. Dont worry, I am sure they will get it fixed for you. I am not a perfectionist, shown very easily by more porn collection organization. I have stuff scattered everywhere, although it is betting a little better. I guess I am usually more worried about getting my stuff to work right and when I see something little at a free site I do not put much worry on it. Of course if I had all my stuff in order I might be more willing to give others a hard time! :)
09-25-08  02:47pm

Reply To Message

11

Jay G (65) REPLY TO #2 - badandy400 :

While it sounds like a great idea it reminds me of my algebrqa classes. My head hurts. LOL
03-04-09  08:39am

Reply To Message

*Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies.

Home - Sites - Users - Reviews - Comments - Categories - Forum

Contact Us - Announcements - FAQ's - Terms & Rules - Porn Review - Webmasters

Protecting Minors
We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.

DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.

To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP!  We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction?  We recommend this helpful resource.

Copyright © 2007 Ranks.com, Inc. and its licensors. All Rights Reserved.


Loaded in 0.02 seconds.