Specifics:
Make the following changes to the rating system
1.Keep 5 stars, but rate each game individually, including tags. Ratings given by each person would be averaged, tags would just be listed with numbers.
That is, If I play 2 or 100 games, those games would be averaged for my personnal rating for that person. That one rating would then be averaged just like now.
If someone chooses not to rate, then those games would be left out, effectively just giving them the average rating (no change).
2.Change the tags to be more helpful, give people a better idea of whether someone does things they don't like. INCLUDE explanations in the instructions. Yes, I know some of it may seem redunant or "well.. duh", but the clearer, the better.
A. If possible (not too much programming, database problem), the ideal would be to rate each style seperately, along with an overall rating.
Minimums would be a Freestyle OR Sequential... then further broken into Standard/Terminator,
Teams, Assassin and perhaps Speed.
B. stratify tags, so that some tags can only be checked (only appear) for certain game types.
Specifically:
1) Assassin (a BIGGIE!)
took out wrong target
2) Speed deadbeated in Speed game
3) Team good teammate (own team only)
poor teammate (own team only)
good opposing team player (? -- not sure if necessary)
OR played as part of a well-coordinated team.
poor communicator OR
English poor
4) Freestyle used "double turns" and other freestyle tricks
C. Label general tags as "negative", "positive" and "neutral"
1) Negatives would include:
Deadbeat
suicided to change game
reported for possible cheating
Threatens/bullies
Poor sport
2) Neutrals would include:
Poor strategy
Legal alliances
Heavy swearing
no chat
3) Friendly
Helpful
good sport
good strategy
D Anyone given less than a 3 could respond, but would also get tags that would appear next to the poor rating column. They would be limited:
1) not true
2) deadbeat with reason
3) I was new
5) rater new
6)sorry I goofed
Like now, these would NOT be moderated. Person could be asked to remove rating (like now), but that would be it. HOWEVER, the "not true" tags would be tallied
The brief summary would appear about like now, with the overall ratings, except that a star or mark of some kind would indicate if there is more detailed information (any individual type ratings or tags). ALSO, there would be a total for the number of times someone responded "not true". A more detailed view would appear if someone clicks on the profile.
Though the tags would not be moderated specifically, there could be a "check" or notifier so that anyone who gets more than a certain number (say 50) "not true" tags and who has more than 3 % "not true" (because if you play 10,000 people, even the best of players may encounter 50 jerks) trigger and automatic check by either the mods or a kind of player jury. (see jiminskiis old suggestion). NOTE those numbers are not set -- statisticians, etc can come up with realistic numbers.
This will improve the following aspects of the site:
Mostly, this would give ratings meaning. No system can ensure everyone is honest and rates correctly, but just like before, those few will be overwhelmed by the honest ratings for anyone who plays more than a few games.
I realize it might seem complicated at first glance, but you would not see most of the options unless they applied.
The two most critical aspects are
#1 averaging the ratings. That means you won't have to remember any previous games, only the most recent one. People will be more likely to rate honestly when they know its not a "forever and all time" rating. At first glance, this might seem a data issue, but really it won't be. Just take all previous games, multiply by the average rating, add in the new rating and divide by the new total. There is always the potential for someone to rate bad once and then not change it, but that can be fixed by pming (if an error) or simply putting the person on your for list (if not an error), as appropriate.
Like now, anyone who really goofs can delete their rating and "start from scratch". In that case, the new rating would go for all previous, but that would be intentional. That is, the person rating would have to want to delete all the old ratings and put in a new one. Because someone can always have a "temper", there might be a default that you cannot rate someone LOWER than rated before. However, those are all tweaks.
Set apart Nuetral issues These are the points of contention. These are all things that matter a great deal to some people, but not to many others. Placing them in a "neutral" category means that someone who just doesn't like swearing can have their say, but without screwing up the whole system.
That is the goal here, to give people information to decide who they want to play -- if they care to take the time. AND to make it easier for everyone.
