Fanpop Article: Pros and Cons (and Questions) About the New Rating System

82

Pros and Cons (and Questions) About the New Rating System

posted by Cinders

To like or not to like? That is the question.

Earlier tonight, the ratings system of Fanpop experienced a massive overhaul. No longer can you rate content on a scale of one to five (ala YouTube), but if you like content, you can "like" it (ala Facebook), or "be a fan" of it.

Dave gave a very good, logical explanation for the change to help assuage some fears and answer some questions:

"Hi Guys,

Thanks for making this pick. There are a lot of reasons we wanted to create a new system for deciding whether fans like something or not. We found that most people were rating either 4 or 5 stars so we thought if you liked it enough, you could just say so. But we found a lot of people also going around abusing the system by voting things negatively just to be malicious or hurt someone else. Fanpop is all about being positive and the new system let's people know you enjoyed their content and not just try to hurt people's feelings. No trophies were removed, the rating trophy now just counts the number of things you've said you are a fan of. As with any major change on the site, we put a lot of time and thought into it to make sure it will make Fanpop a better place. We know that people don't like change, but hopefully you'll agree that this is a better system for everyone!

Dave" [link]

Now before we all freak out (like I already did when I first saw the change), let's address these points. Dave is absolutely right. There are trolls enough on Fanpop that the diligent user link created the link, as well as the link for premium content that's ignored by other users.

Despite warnings in the VRSOF spot about posting links for the purpose of "medal-whoring" and despite posted and repeated rules on what kind of content should be posted, and suggestions as to what warrants a five-star rating, most of the content in the VRSOF is one or more of the following: A) Recently posted (within the last 24 hours) B) Poorly key-worded/credited C) Repeated content. Despite these things, people still tend to rate the content upon request, and generally (without giving it much thought) five star the content.

So it's clear that the majority of Fanpoppers don't think very hard about how they rate. Either they're trolls and one-star content just to be mean, or they rate an image with no credit or any key words five stars just to be nice. In that sense, this "like" solution (as I call it) seems to be a very sensible way to go.

But then, there are the people like me. I recently described myself as an "anal retentive credit-crazy keyword queen." And it's true. A student of DrDevience, uncredited and poorly keyworded images became a particular pet peeve of mine, especially as I try really hard to give accurate credit and relevant keywords when I post content. Images especially would get a variety of ratings from one-star (with an explanation, always) to five stars (with praise, sometimes).

In addition to that, I tend to rate articles based on their length, relevance to the spot topic, what they say, and how its said. Here are two articles I would rate dramatically differently, even if I "liked" the content:

"mY oPiNiOn"

"Dogz r pretty cool. i used 2 have a dog. but ppl say dat dogs r cooler den cats. mabeh deir rite, but i dunno. but personly, i like catz cuz deir fuzzy and cute. CATZ 4 EVA! DA END!"

Vs

"Cats or Dogs?"

"First of all, let's just say that dogs are pretty awesome. I had a dog growing up and I loved him to pieces. But some would argue that dogs are make better pets than cats. It's a matter of opinion, but I think they're wrong. Here's why... etc."

Now, you may LIKE or FAN the article because it talks about cats and dogs (always a fun debate), but which one would you rate higher?

This presents a problem with the new ratings system. Maybe this problem is just one that fans like me have, but I just wanted to step up and represent that population, however small it may be! (I forget - is Fanpop a democracy or a dictatorship? Ah well, have them throw me in the Fanpop dungeon, I'm speaking my piece!)

I'm gonna miss deciding the quality of the content I'm rating. It's true, if a video has accurate keywords, I'll tend to five-star it. Same goes for most links (although I do like relevant titles and descriptions with my links, so I know what I'm clicking). But content like images and articles, I'm very picky about. And I'll miss expressing that opinion via rating. True, I can still comment and preach proper key-wording, but it won't be the same. Also, ratings tend to reflect when content is particularly bad - like a dangerous link, or a poorly written article. When I see 2.5s and 3s as the average rating, I know there's something about that content that's off, or at least controversial, and it tends to catch my interest. How will I pick out that kind of content now?

Back when I was freaking out about the change, I was talking to link and I said: "I wouldn't rate my friends' Facebook statuses on a scale of one to five! And I wouldn't like content on Fanpop." (Clarifying that I meant clicking the "be a fan of" button, not that I didn't appreciate Fanpop content, of course).

So while I understand where the Fanpop Four are coming from with this, and it is a very positive rating system, I'm gonna have to be the killjoy that says, "No, but, wait!" Because it does make me sad to lose the old rating system. And I don't feel like a hero anymore when I find and report trolled content to the ATSOF.

An era in Fanpop has ended, my friends.

(... Unless the F4 decide to change it back...?)

Also, a list of questions I bombarded DarkSarcasm with and decided to include. In response to Dave's explanation:

1) Does a one/two-star rating on old content now count as a "being a fan"?
2) If a user one-starred content in the past, is that in their ratings trophy count?
3) If we accidentally fan something, is there any way we can 'un-fan' it? (asks link)
4) The Great Facebook Question: Will there ever be a "dislike" (or "Not a fan") button?
5) The "If-I-Told-You-I'd-Have-To-Kill-You" Question: Do ratings (or "being fans") still count towards getting a medal and if so, has the weight on ratings changed at all in that respect?

LowriLorenza89, lildwaynelolz and 80 others like this

17 more comments

loading additional comments...

misanthrope86 LOL! I guess the bigger problem is the [i]people[/i] who do the trolling and medal whoring. I think a punch in the face is the only way to fix that kind of problem. I have actually noticed an increase in the number of rates things are getting compared to normal, but I guess that could be a result of people taking notice of the new rating layout and using, rather than an increase in medal whoring.

nandacavalieri *comment jumping*

makintosh IMO the new rating system only makes things easier for medal whoring. It ends with the troll thing, that's true. But I agree with all of you....this is not a rating system anymore. I'm sure the F4 could find better ways to remove [i]negativism[/i] on Fanpop Maybe we could still express our opinions via rating.... We could rate this way: ie. if you wanna rate an article you could decide if the article is... .[i]well written[/i] (only positive ratings are allowed. On the contrary, if you think the article is poorly written you had the choice of not picking that [i]category[/i] ) .[i]interesting[/i] .[i]properly credited[/i] and so on... Hope you get the idea....

nandacavalieri Depends, if they change the medal system, like they said the would, it will be harder for medal whoring.

makintosh And, of course, we should retrieve the [u][i] green star look [/i][/u]

makintosh These are my suggestions: http://www.fanpop.com/spots/fanpop/images/10981278/title/new-rating-system-suggestion http://www.fanpop.com/spots/fanpop/images/10981383/title/new-rating-system-suggestion We could use a Fanpop colorbar. When you decide the content is interesting, controversial...whatever, the grey star turns into different colours (meaning different things, for example, red for controversial, blue for fairly credited...) If you don't think the content is interesting the star remains grey What do you think? IMO rating stuff should be funny!

germany123 honestly i am sort of relieved..the rating system had no purpose anymore since we all know that people didnt rate fairly... what i would like is a sort of "dislike" button..but one that only shows after say 7 dislikes..or 10. this way one or two trolls would have no effect but a greater number of people would then result in an actual "this is really poor content" warning.

Priscilita22 [i]"@ Priscilita - Maybe instead of a "dislike" we can have a "be a fan" and "be a really BIG fan!" LOL. They're still positive, but they allow for expressing a deep and boundless passion for some content."[/i] That's not a bad idea! Lol... Or also what germany123 just said, about having a dislike button, but it only showing after about 7 dislikes... There could be a way around showing bad content without troll interfering! I agree that the poor ratings (when it had been rated by several people) helped to separate the good content from the bad ones. Anyways, some interesting points!!

dave And this is why we love you guys so much, because you care! Cinders, once again, you've outdone yourself. Users like you and misanthrope86 and the handful of others of you who cared enough to rate with discretion and thoughtfulness were what we hoped everyone would behave like, taking the time and effort to rate fairly. Unfortunately for every one of you guys, there were many many more who rated recklessly. We carefully looked through all of our data, and trust me we have a lot of it, to see how many folks were actually rating and it turned out almost everyone was rating either a 5 or a 1. We assumed the 1 would be if you didn't like something (or were a troll) and 5 if you liked something. Since it was so obviously binary (like or dislike), we decided if someone likes something just click the button, if not, don't click. Simple as that and this way, voicing their opinion by not clicking doesn't allow any negative effect that trolls can have by voting something down just because they don't like the user or relationship or character rather than judging the content for itself. And no Cinders, to answer your question, 1/2 stars most definitely would not be counted as being a fan of something. :) And if content is actually bad or offensive enough, we would hope that you would report it not just rate it low. As for the "medal whores", we take into account a lot more than just the ratings when calculating who deserves a medal or not. So users who get others or create fake users to fan things to cheat the system and try to earn medals will find it difficult. Cheaters never prosper! You guys are what make Fanpop so awesome, not the little stars or buttons. Thanks so much for caring enough to voice your opinion everyone, we really do value your feedback and are listening, but know that the changes we make we take a lot into consideration.

germany123 i sort of have an issue with the name..cause its confusing (becoming a fan of someONE, someTHING or joining a club) cant it be like...fantastic? this is fantastic?

papa Great post Cinders. I'm on an iPhone so I my fat fingers can't type much more a this time. Germany, I really like your idea!

Cliff040479 Now that i read this i love the new system!!!!!!!!

Cinders I find myself warming to the idea. At first, I was thrown (or as I put it in the article, freaking out). But I definitely see the logic behind the change. Like I said, it's just the end of an era. Thanks for answering the questions, dave! And I understand about typing on phones, papa, so thanks for saying something!

knifewrench I've had a short ponder on the issues... what if we kept the "Fan of it" rating system. However when you click this button, you have to determine it's quality out of three stars. This way, trolls don't get their strange thrills out of 1 starring things and rating-fans get to show how they feel about the content. Good idea? Cop out? Stupid? I don't know, thoughts? EDIT: I guess I explained the idea poorly, and I'm not very good at rephrasing it, I'll just paste the convo me and Germs had about it Germany123 says: how would that be different to the old system though? Knifewrench says: No one-starring Therefore, positive feedback or no feedback Germany123 says: but then the 3* would be the one star ? hmm maybe not Knifewrench says: No, just says that it's like quite good but not great Germany123 says: cause youd still be a fan..i see yes i see now James says: So it's not insulting it, just saying it's alright

rubberduck2 yeah there are lots of new good ideas, i especially like knifewrenchs idea

Fitch 'I'm a fan' of this article

Irina92 Thx for the article Cinders, it was really helpful!=) To tell you the truth I'm still not a fan of the new rating -or more correctly- fanning system. I find it confusing and I was definitely rating a lot with 5 stars, but also with 4,3,2 and sometimes 1. So it'll not be the same as the old one for me and many others (who I guess aren't the majority of fanpopers). On the other hand, I totally understand why you did it, Dave, Papa and generally the administrators of fp. I just hope this system will help eliminating the cheaters and the ones who used to rate low if they didn't like the uploader. And if it doesn't work we can always try sth else, right?

em_em Thanks for the article Cinders it helped clear up bits of 'new rating system' I'd seen dotted around :D I'm away for a few days and comeback to confusion after a big change, I admit I get slightly scared lol :P I'll have to have a wonder around and see how i like the new system (usually not a one for change though! lol)

zanesaaomgfan The system is okay. Its only when people tell me to fan things and there not the best and don't deserve a fan, I would rate it 1-3 stars. Can't do that...

Nine00 I rate an image good when I LIKE it. If an image is great why rate it low just because of keywords no one really uses? And if there is no credit you don't know if the person made the image him/herself. I never put "credit-me" it looks silly.

harold I despise the new system and don't really understand how anyone who was a regular user of the site before could stand it. This seems like a solution to a symptom of a problem, not the problem itself. The problems are/were: * the vast majority of users are not rating content * of the tiny number of users who did rate content in the original system, a majority would rate inconsiderately (the binary fashion that Dave mentioned) The way to solve a problem in any situation is to evaluate why the problem is happening - discover the cause of the problem - and address that cause so that the cause is removed. To use a medical analogy: a person comes into the hospital, bleeding from the mouth. The way to solve the problem is to figure out why the patient is bleeding - some internal injury - and heal that damage, stitch the wound, replace the stomach lining, as appropriate. Removing the rating system is analogous to telling the patient to "Wear this red gown and bandana. Now no one will notice that you're bleeding." It doesn't address the problems at all. As others have pointed out, we're still left with the problem that almost no one is rating - sorry, [i]fanning[/i] - content. It also does nothing to discourage the few people (when considered against the main body of users) who would rate stuff recklessly from fanning stuff recklessly. There's a host of new problems, too: * Now we've also lost any gradation in the rating/quality measurement. Even though the page sorts are still called "sort by rating" (oops!), the sort by rating is pretty meaningless now. * with ratings, users could tell whether they'd viewed content already. "Oh, I see I rated this 2 stars when I watched it years ago, I don't need to see it again." Now we're stuck with having to try to remember all the crap content that was legitimately rated low before, because we're not fans of it (and not about to be, either) and we don't want to waste our time with it again. What's the solution? Writing comments could help, but that will seem like trolling: "I watched this and didn't care for it." THAT'S going to go over well with users! Sure, that's MUCH better than low ratings! AND those comments will be lost/useless if they don't appear in the first page of comments. Who's going to page through all the comments on an article or video to figure out whether they already saw it or not? No, instead we'll be wasting huge chunks of our time looking at stuff over and over again. Or, as misanthrope86 says, we'll just use the site a lot less. * No, we can't UN-fan content, which is just plain stupid. I've found that I'm a fan of a huge amount of content which I rated as mediocre or OK in the past. The volume of that stuff [b]of course[/b] vastly outweighs the actual good content, much less the excellent content on the site. So if I'm trying to find something that I really liked, I can't anymore, unless I saved it to my favorites. * Because there was no transition period where users were informed what was coming and how to prepare for it, and no way for people to remove their fan status once it was applied for them when the feature was activated, pretty much every existing user who was rating stuff regularly is very likely to not use the fan feature at all. "Why bother?" I say to myself (and in this thread I read others saying the same thing) "I can never fix my list of "fanned" content so that it makes sense, so I'm not going to add to the mess that's already there." So instead of getting rid of the reckless raters, it's getting rid of the conscientious ones. Which is [u]exactly opposite of what the real solution should be[/u]. You don't want your power users leaving the site or using the site less, you want more power users. An idea for a solution to the problem (which isn't going to make me any friends, anywhere): [i]try to attract mature users to the site[/i]. We few who use the site now have been trying (some of us for four years) to get casual users to rate, and rate properly at that. The vast majority of users are teens and even pre-teens masquerading as teens. The vast majority of them are unlikely to want to follow any sort of guidelines/etiquette/standards for rating content...indeed they are often constitutionally disinclined to follow rules. It is the job of a teen to push the boundaries and resist the so-called "correct" action. DrD, myself and others demonstrate our decrepit old age by urging such to do the sober thing. It's ridiculous, and it will never happen. What I've observed over the years, though, is that as the users mature, many of them become more interested in doing things more considerately. But just when they might help stem the tide of chaotic behavior - bam! They leave the pop! Why are they leaving Fanpop in favor of other Web 2.0 sites? Answer that question, and you may have the beginnings of an answer to the problem. The problem is that there just aren't enough users that care about rating, about maintaining good content and open discourse on the site. Those users are a vast minority. The amount of users that "fan" content is not going to be significantly different than the number of users that rated content before, until the user demographics change somewhat. Just an aside: I'm not against teens in any way, and I don't mean to say that teens hold a monopoly on rebellion, immaturity and disrespect - there are many very high-profile adult users who have been banned over the years who demonstrate that that is certainly not the case. I also don't mean to suggest that teens or pre-teens are incapable of being serious in dedication to their favorite topics. Not at all! Many of the best raters in the old system, the best content posters, the most erudite commenters, were teens! What we need are more mature users, no matter their age.

Cinders Point-by-point response to "Untitled Rant" by harold. "This seems like a solution to a symptom of a problem, not the problem itself... Removing the rating system is analogous to telling the patient to "Wear this red gown and bandana. Now no one will notice that you're bleeding." It doesn't address the problems at all." This metaphor is very vivid, but also accurate. I have nothing really to say or add, just want to say that the next time I cut my finger slicing onions, I'm gonna wear a red shirt instead of putting iodine on it. "As others have pointed out, we're still left with the problem that almost no one is rating - sorry, fanning - content. It also does nothing to discourage the few people (when considered against the main body of users) who would rate stuff recklessly from fanning stuff recklessly." Someone pointed out to me that it seems more people are fanning, but, as you put it, doing so recklessly. I see things that aren't worth fanning with several fans (and by aren't worth fanning, I consider three stars or less by old system standards). Similarly, BECAUSE I don't "fan" content I would have three-starred-or-less in the old system, I've been fanning things much less, and I look at my ratings trophy - or is it a "fan" trophy now? - with sadness. "* Now we've also lost any gradation in the rating/quality measurement. Even though the page sorts are still called "sort by rating" (oops!), the sort by rating is pretty meaningless now." This really DOES bug me. It bugs me that I can't give something three stars. It bugs me that I have to NOT rate it in order to make my (silent) point. I kinda feel my voice is not being heard. "Now we're stuck with having to try to remember all the crap content that was legitimately rated low before, because we're not fans of it (and not about to be, either) and we don't want to waste our time with it again. What's the solution? Writing comments could help, but that will seem like trolling: "I watched this and didn't care for it."" Today, I specifically said on someone's image with no keywords or credit or even a real title, "I would fan this image, but I don't fan things that are this poorly keyworded and credited." I don't want to do that on EVERY IMAGE I DON'T FAN. "THAT'S going to go over well with users! Sure, that's MUCH better than low ratings! AND those comments will be lost/useless if they don't appear in the first page of comments." I really hear "angry harold" in this quote. I know, because it sounds a lot like "stand-up comedy harold" in your fanpop comedy debut. Except more bitter. "You don't want your power users leaving the site or using the site less, you want more power users." This made me think of myself as a power ranger. Go, go power users! "An idea for a solution to the problem (which isn't going to make me any friends, anywhere): try to attract mature users to the site." Would it be not fanpopesque of me to suggest that Fanpop should be invitation only? I remember when livejournal used to be selective like that. On the other hand, I don't think it's always about maturity. Sometimes, it's just plain apathy. "The problem is that there just aren't enough users that care about rating, about maintaining good content and open discourse on the site. Those users are a vast minority." One could argue here (not that I am) that if the majority doesn't care, than they outvote the minority on that. Then again, the minority is underrepresented. I demand at least three chairs in the Fanpop Congress, on account of I am a power ranger. Overall, harold, your rant made me feel inspired. I've tried to get used to the new system, and I want to look at it positively. This article was an attempt at an impartial examination. But you've swayed me to the "Not a fan of the fan system" side once again, away from the flip-flopping middle. I noticed that, since the change, my ratings trophy lost some numbers (due to things I rated low). And there have been things posted SINCE the new ratings system where I really wished there was a "Not really a fan, no" button (only shorter, but with the same sarcastic tone). EDIT: And to Nine00: [The following is not meant to be offensive, just comical. Nothing personal.] "keywords no one really uses"? Really? REALLY? So you think Google has a magical robot that looks at every image individually to see if an image has any "ghosts" in it like its Haley Joel Osment? Search engines, including the ones on Fanpop, and Google of course, use KEY WORDS to help random people on the web find random images. Poor keywords is what causes that flood of useless imagery you get when you type in a keyword at Google. Good keywords is what helps you find that specific image you are looking for. And THAT's why key words will save your life one day.

DarkSarcasm I was looking at the "content I'm a fan of" today, and I noticed that I've rated 5 links in the past week. I used to just pop into random spots & rate stuff (as long as it was worth at least a 3), but since I only 'fan' things I would've rated a 4 or 5, the numbers have dropped drastically. If I didn't know better, I'd say Fanpop was trying to discourage 'rating' altogether. I agree with Harold, we need more mature users. We USED to have some, but they either got lives (*gasp*) or were run off by the insane fans. My question is, how are we going to get these people to join? Why should they? Just look at the front page - what are the first two clubs listed under the search bar? Justin Bieber & Twilight. In the words of Liz Lemon, "That's a dealbreaker!" I get it. Those spots attract people, those people + ads = money for Fanpop. But if I happened to stumble across a site like this and saw that, I wouldn't bother signing up. (Why am I still here? I really do wonder sometimes. But this place has been home to me for almost 3 years, I can't just leave it!) The point to this mini-rant is, we do need mature users. Desperately. But how are we supposed to get them when the 11 year olds parading as teens are the majority? Nobody wants to deal with that. [i]The problem is that there just aren't enough users that care about rating, about maintaining good content and open discourse on the site.[/i] Again, Sir Harold is right. I can think of about three users who are still active at the moment that haven't given up. I'm not one of them. Whenever I try to keep a spot clean (they're still spots to me, dammit) by making suggestions, all I get is "omg get a life" and "stfu, i do wut i want!" - I can't remember the last time someone actually listened to me. Is it really that hard to add credit & a few appropriate keywords or, heaven forbid, put something in the spot it actually belongs in? Apologies, I think Harold slipped me some of his Tangent Juice when he stopped by. I'm done now. =P

misanthrope86 harold for President.

fanfly ^^ I second that motion. You've almost got me convinced, harold. When it was first implemented I was so pleased that it meant there would be no more ratings trolls that I think I let that color my vision. But having been using the system for a while now, I've grown increasingly dissatisfied with it. I'm still not as passionately against it as you guys, but the glow is definitely fading fast...

14

Raters of the Lost Ark

added by maybeastarbucks

13

"Here you go, sweetheart. Play on this fairy website while I hook up with this MILF."

added by misanthrope86

Source: Fanpop, Fairies and Fornication

I'm being harassed by NemesisPrime92

added by KataraLover

10

Duplicated Clubs - Just a little sample

added by makintosh

Source: Fanpop - edited by me

4

Dean-girlz / medals

added by karlyluvsam

Source: screen cap . by me karlyluvsam

6

Guys, girls, and good stuff

added by DrBsNumber1Fan

Source: ME!

7

the internet is supposded to have uncencored things on it

posted by darkinvader

Never pay any attention to the cencored fanpop thing it is acting like SOPA and PIPA and ACTA and CIAS we hate that because those bastards try to shut down the internet and we know it would come plus they crashed all our computers with their evil messages good thing we saved the internet remember people never let the new fanpop act like sopa pipa cias and acta because thety hate cencored and copyright things and also the baby martians are crying because the new fanpop acts this waytwards them and also fanpop also has crappy netflix tv show ads that people hate that is the few reassons people...

12

Five Things That I think Fanpop Should Add ★

posted by x-Yumi-x3

*Repost
( Please notice that I'm in a rush, please excuse any mistakes. )
I had actually planned on making an article about Fanpop a few months ago and never had time and I still don't.
So instead of me just going into it full force detail like I planned I'm just gonna skim through it.
I'm writing this because I've been on Fanpop since 2011 and it has been amazing, but in the past year or so Fanpop has turned into a ghost town. It's so bad even some of the biggest clubs aren't really active anymore.
It really makes me upset because I can't even go to most of the clubs that I use to visit because...

2

Friendly 100 Cap

added by NocKairu

Source: Fanpop

10

Papa's Moment of Fame

added by Fitch

Source: Fitch, Fanpop

10

Famous Persons Spots

posted by Sephisis17

Everybody knows that there are famous persons. celebrities which are know worl wide, that appear in TV, in magazines... One of the many places where you can find those celebrities, is Fanpop! There are many spots, dedicated to those persons! There for, the users that join those spot are, obviously, fans of those celebrities! But... it seems that that "rule" is no longer respected! For at least two times in a row, i've seen users defamating celebrities images! And that of course, doesn't let the fans of a certain celeb, happy! It happens mostly in pick where some users attack the image of a...

32

United States of Fanpop Flag

added by inespinto

Source: Mabe By inespinto

8

Earth Day 2013 Cap

added by geocen

Source: fanpop.com

7

Because Rihanna and Nicki Minaj were both in "Twilight"

added by KateKicksAss

Source: Me

58

A Fanpop Challenge: Pending Spots

posted by cressida

As most of you know, there is a special holding pen for newly-created spots -- the link arena. Spots remain there until:
a) they have a significant amount of links, videos & images
b) there are enough fans to deem it popular ... or at least raise its status out of the 'geek stuck in the trash can' level.

Often I roam around, looking at these new creations, trying to help out those poor spots that have no videos, links, picks, or images to their name. But there are still spots there that were born over a year ago with little to no links to make it interesting enough to join.

So I would like...