Currently there is only rating system based on reviews rating.
Quite usefull could be rating system 1-10 like on the imdb.com. There are lots of peoples on metal-archives who don't speak english very well, for example me Write every review is for us quite hard, to check it few times for mistakes, asking friends about grammar etc.
This was a first reason for this new rate system suggested by me.
The another reason is the reliably of the rating, if there will be one review at 50%, it can be write with someone with extreme music taste, and the same album can be awesome for most users.
All i want to say is more votes = more reliably.
Of course review system is very good. It works great and it must stay but i just suggest addition rating system. Make rate system available for most users, not only reviews writer!
that's all... at the end i will give you links to some imdb pages

top250:
http://www.imdb.com/chart/top
rated by me (same thing could be added here too):
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=25473951

cheers
MusX

Mmm it could be useful as a separate rating system. Albums could have 2 average ratings: one for the ratings with reviews, and the other for all ratings. If you're suggesting that, I agree. I fight with english to read it, so I couldn't write a good review even if my life depended of it. And there are so many albums which should have a rating... but I can't do it

Wow, the return of the king... 8.8? And rated better than the other films of The lord of the rings?

It has been said many times before that it is about the reviews and not the score.

ok, so currently there is a review system.
but why metal-archives could not have a score system?
imdb.com score system is very accurate! don't you think?

more opinions please

I'm actually writing this response because I was going to suggest the same thing (and I found this conversation thread). I definitely agree that Metal Archives should enable users to simply rate the albums without forcing them to write a review. IMDB has these two functionalities separated and I'd say it gives its users much better idea about quality of movies. Given the number of users that Metal Archives have, I don't think it is necessary to demand justification for every vote you'd post. IMDB-like rating system could provide other advantages as well: identify albums with biggest number of votes, drill down statistics by user's age/country/music taste, etc.

I wouldn't mind such rating system, but this was already suggested numerous times - even I did so 4 years ago - and it was always turned down.

so we can try together introduce it this time

... and 50000 albums will have 9.99 or 10

only reviews !!

if they deserve for 9.99 or 10 they will have it... something wrong?
could you explain what you mean? i see no problem with this... maybe there is a bug somewhere in my suggestion
rating system would be available for registered users only, so there could be no spamming it.

Piotr is right.

Most people who can't write reviews are just idiots. Idiots usually have a two point rating system: either something is 'cool' or it's 'stupid'. Therefore most idiots who can't write a proper review would spam the rating with 1's for albums they dislike and 10's for albums they like - and NOT albums that really deserve such rating. And this will make the rating useless...

true
that's exactly what happens on Blabbermouth, I personally don't want that shit here

many but not the most

yep they would but it still depends on their music taste

rating is very relatively...
i know there will be lots of 10's for some shity albums, for ex. new Metallica.
but overall those 10's depends on someones music taste and it will be accurately with some others music tastes
for us, with mature music taste this one specific score will be useless but there are also many others people who will agree with this score!

as i've already said:
more votes = more reliably (even those 1's and 10's, cause it depends on humans music taste)

Let's also take into account the possibility (and probability) of some of the rating-happy idiots registering extra accounts just to vote more than once.

It's guaranteed to happen.

Its rather pointless as you'll simply get a ton of fanboys spamming 10s for crappy metalcore/melodic metal/whatever records, vs a bunch of people who a vendetta against such crap spamming 1s. How anyone could possibly think this would give you anything even remotely close to an accurate reflection of any particular album is beyond me. Ya, it may suck that your english isn't good enough to contribute, but if you really think a single near meaningless vote is going to be worth anything instead you're fooling yourself.

I really really wish we would scrap the scores attached to the reviews altogether.

I don't feel that it would be a good idea, either. I suppose I can see where it would be of interest to that type of person who enjoys crunching numbers purely for fun, but the problems attendant with the idea as it is typically presented seem to outweigh this justification.

This site's (relative) lack of congruence with far more mainstream, populist sites in a similar vein is one of a handful of things that makes it somewhat special....in 2007, simply being a website related to a niche subculture is not enough to preserve this. Unfortunately.

I definitely think this every time I hear someone say that the score isn't important. Makes me wonder why it's there.

I have read nearly all the conversations on this topic. What truly amazes me is the iron conviction about future behavior of all those "fanboys scrapping 10s and 1s". The discussions are mostly centered around assumptions that are so far unjustified and unproved in practice. Am I supposed to believe that vast portion of Metal Archives members are idiots? Am I supposed to believe that there are thousands of young people who have nothing better to do than register multiple accounts and click around this website all day? Am I supposed to believe that IMDB members are all proper, intellectual citizens, while Metal Archives members are uncivilized horde of anarchists?

If the system is not tested in practice, we can never discuss its REAL drawbacks and/or take respective corrective actions. Endless "they-would" discussions remind me of some kind of absurd intellectual theatre play. Did you know that IMDB uses a corrective algorithm (http://www.imdb.com/ratings_explained) to filter out "scrapping fanboys"? It is not so difficult to use a handful of statistical methods and purify the collected data. (I can help with creation of such algorithm, if that would be the straw that broke the administrators' opinion.) Pilot project for top-thousand members can be run first. Limits can be set - "you can rate ten albums per one approved review". Only after all this fails, will I accept all the "they-are-idiots" theses. Before that, I'm simply not content with conspiracy theory as a major argument for not-doing-it.

Well... I ask myelf if this is a really good idea. I have my doubts and these stem from he rating that is already taken place. If you look at the reviews that are written and the points you mainly get the idea that people love the albums or they are disgusted by them. Top or flop. There is hardly something in between. The first thing would be to writen them based on the real facts and not that pushing/flaming of one favourite/hate band. If that would be done then there could be a discussion about how to implement a new way of rating system.

A review should be neutral and that are not many here. To understand what I mean take a look here: http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=9535
The first one can hardly be described as neutral and dealing with the facts. I read to this one some days ago, so I got to know it.

If the idiocy of the average metalhead isn't a strong enough argument, we can always blame the increase of bandwidth usage.

This is a great idea. The lesser known bands with no reviews could have a rating.

I too think its.

It's a terrible idea. You'd have heaps of people giving Trivium 0/10s, and heaps of other people giving a ton of undeserving bands 10/10. It's easy to give a rating like that, but it's not as easy writing a review justifying why your think some albums deserves a 90%, or a 40%, or whatever.



Why on Earth should a review be Neutral? The idea of a review is inherently biased, you're not going to write a review that says "This album is Power/Black/Doom Metal, make up your mind about it" are you? No, you're going to tell people what you thought about the album, whether it sucks, is mediocre, or is awesome.



based on the real facts? What?? Last thing I checked, music is subjective. For some people (like me) The "real fact" is that Abruptum is noise with no redeeming qualities. FOr other people, Abruptum is the logical, final evolution of Black Metal or whatever.

Same here. I'm never comfortable attributing scores.

btw, anybody noticed how bad the IMDB list is? Lord of the Rings, the 5th best movie of all-time?? Gimme a break. A music list would of course be even worse, as people tend to be more passionate about their favorite bands (and, even more noticeably, their least favorite bands).

I don't know, I always think scores are like the ultimate quick summary of the review (when the score fits the review, of course..)

This is probably an argument for a different thread though.

That's basically the reason I don't like Blabbermouth. I do however think this is a good idea. It is very annoying to have a bunch of fan boys on the forums yelling at each other, but if there are a bucnh of 1's and 10's then it should balance out to a nice even 5 leaving the ones with serious opinions to better influence the ratings.