Oh, and the only reviewer with at least 30 reviews who has given more than 10% 0s is bl00df1r3d34th, whose grim rating-distribution looks like this:

[0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 4, 5, 5, 10, 10, 11, 14, 15, 20, 20, 22, 25, 26, 31, 32, 33, 34, 42, 89, 92, 97, 100]

That 100 is for, unsurprisingly, Bathory's Blood Fire Death.

At the other end of the spectrum, the 100+ reviewer with the highest average rating is actually not optimuszgrime or grimdoom, it's Demon_of_the_Fall, who averages 90 from this breakdown:

[10, 76, 77, 78, 78, 80, 80, 80, 81, 81, 81, 82, 83, 84, 84, 84, 84, 85, 85, 85, 86, 86, 86, 87, 87, 87, 87, 87, 87, 88, 88, 88, 88, 88, 88, 89, 89, 89, 89, 89, 89, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 91, 91, 91, 91, 91, 91, 91, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 93, 93, 93, 93, 93, 93, 93, 93, 94, 94, 94, 94, 94, 94, 95, 95, 95, 95, 96, 96, 96, 96, 96, 97, 97, 97, 98, 98, 98, 98, 99, 99, 99, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100]

That spiteful 10 is for St. Anger...

So who's the one with the most 0% reviews?

I can imagine giving 100s to whichever album I think deserves it, be it 5 albums or 500, and if my opinion changes, so does the review. I don't like to adjust my scores to give some false appearance of proportionality, as it would rob my reviews of any genuine honesty.

Here are the only reviewers who have given more than 5 0s:

PatientZero: 6
bl00df1r3d34th: 7
oneyoudontknow: 7
Tepes_The_Unweeping: 8
requiem99: 8
droneriot: 11

droneriot has 122 reviews, though, and they're almost uniformly distributed, with 6 100s and an overall average of 58.

It's too bad that Requiem removed all of his reviews, I don't think I got a chance to read any of his 0% ratings. I'll probably work myself up a little more on the 0s when I get around to doing a few more negative ones, I've encountered a good amount of shit of late that deserves such scores.

Goddamn. I wanted to be a reviewer when I first joined the site, but I got caught up in the forums, and look at me now. 1,000+ posts, maybe 10-11 reviews, and a few more that got rejected or nuked.

I do have about 8 reviews in different stages of completeness - some of them are rejected/nuked reviews that I'm trying to rewrite. The one I'm going to work on tonight is a positive review for Opeth - Deliverance that I'm trying my hardest to make worthwhile. Wish me luck.

Man, I wish I had an average of around 58%. Mine's probably the mid/upper 70's... far too high.

I'm pretty sure I have exactly 5 0% reviews. My average is probably somewhere around the 60s or 70s...

caspian: 4 0s, 8 100s, average 72 from 317 total.
Empyreal: 5 0s, 8 100s, average 74 from 225 total.

My average must be in the mid 80's.. I see myself hopefully reviewing a lot more and improving a lot since I need it in the future. I can't wait to be the guy that people actually might be talking about or praising someday

sweet! Although I hope you didn't actually manually add them all up :/

I can request you enough bands and releases that would very well fit to this.

You're a miracle worker my friend, thank you.

Am I actually the only one who hasn't written a 100% review yet?

Even my alltime favourite album (Rotting Christ's "Thy Mighty Contract" has "only" gotten 99% from me. I'm still in search for the "perfect album".

Of the people with 100 or more reviews, 9 have filed no 100% ratings: CannibalCorpse, darkreif, Drowned, Gutterscream, KayTeeBee, Mungo, ruigeroeland, Sean16, thebleakhorizon.

Of these Mungo is the real anti-exaggerator, having filed one 97 (for Paranoid) and nothing else above 95.

Also:

The_Boss: 1 0, 3 100s, average 78 from 102 total.

(And no, I'm not doing this "by hand". Computers are our friends!)

You seem to be quite excellent at this sort of thing, Sisters. How about throwing all of us stat fans a bone, giving us a spreadsheet and sorting out the top 50 according to mean/mode/median, standard deviation, number of 100's, 0's, sorting out the reviews according to percentages (eg. 0-20%, 21-40% etc..) and so on? (note that I don't know how long this takes, so sorry if that's an impractical or hard thing to do)

I would offer you some motivation but I'm stingy, so, yeah You would certainly have the gratitude of the stat freaks among the board, though!

...or how about doing it for a bit larger sample... I'd be very interested in finding out my own position, but I only have something like 70 reviews.

The standard deviation is a very interesting number.

... and here's Grimdoom's response to you all

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=12229#66546

I want to see the top 100 reviewers... If only for the sake of my own ego.

Here you go:

reviewers.csv

reviewer,reviews,100s,0s,average,median,deviation for all reviewers with at least 10 reviews.

Interesting, although I have the second highest count of total 100s, my cumulative scoring average is only about 83, which is lower than close to half of the reviewers in the 800 you've listed.

There are people with a lower average than me. I knew it. I love the world too much.

I don't think giving positive reviews to Burzum and Absurd count as loving the world. You probably just don't have enough time on your hands to moan about how gay you think current day power and folk metal bands are.

I thought my average would be higher than 72.7. Pleases me to see it's not too slanted by my love of generic brutal death.

At least he moans the truth.

Oh he doesn't moan about them, he just quaintly describes what he thinks is wrong with them. If you want moaners, look at almost every other reviewer who does negative reviews exclusively for those genres on a regular basis, not just the AFMF.

When i said "moan", I was merely quoting you so there was no need to analyze the statement sir.

Damn, I thought I had like 75 reviews, my counting is bad, I only have 62. I'll need to pump out some more.

My Average is much lower than I expected, 68%. Considering my first few negatives I was unwilling to give horribly low scores (I think I gave a Superjoint Ritual Album a 40 although it was fucking terrible)I am truly surprised. I guess my recent trend of writing negative reviews (I don't think I've given out anything higher than a 75 in about 10 reviews) has started to influence my score.

Also, 1000th Post!!!!!!!! Oh yeah! Ha, I joined a month after Empyreal, he has 7300...

thanks!

According to this I'm in the top 50, Although I suppose this does count the shit I deleted! I suppose if I took the reviews I was happy with it would be much smaller score. My average was like 78, it would be lower if I bothered with more deathcore albums and such... but it turns out I'd rather avoid shit I know is shit... fairly sensible if you ask me! And BastardHead, hells_unicorn and zeingard are doing quite a good job reviewing bollocks anyway.

That's fine, I like to analyze statements regardless of need, it tends to irritate and drive away people who are usually not worth talking to.

You also like to be annoying as hell and whine about trivial shit when it's uncalled for and in places its not needed. So less of that, please.

sister_of_merciless, can you explain the difference between average and median in terms of why those two figures are so far apart, which it is in my case for instance? Gawd, I am hopelessly out of touch with stats.

Median is the score of the review that perfectly falls in the middle of all the ones (the number separating the higher half of a sample from the lower half, to quote Wiki). For example, if one has written reviews of 0, 2, and 100, the median is 2, even though the average is 34.

I might be missing your point, though; I thought you were a math major. Or maybe you just don't know the term median in English.

I am not a math major, good God, no, I am not mortified of math but it's not a favourite of mine either. I am a major in accounting and finance, which does apply stats to an extent but ah, the power of MS Excel allows you to get away with huge gaps in theoretical knowledge.

Now that you explained it, I think I remember what it is.

Ah, I see. I think I remember what I've heard about your major, too, now that you have explained it. Good if I was any help.

It definitely was helpful, you just explained it in the simplest terms possible. Are YOU a math major or something?

No...

By the way, I think I've actually found an error in the median calculation. For example, Falconsbane has 41 reviews and 12 of those are 100%ers, and yet his median is marked as 100. makaze and Rippingheadache are two other examples. These examples were immediately noticeable because their median value was shown as 100, and I think there could be some other reviewers with erroneous median values.

-

Just a question, sisters: where do you get the data? It seems like reviews that are deleted are still being counted.

Hmmm...looks like sisters put some formula which is maybe not entirely foolproof. Even in my case, the median score is given as 63, but I haven't given any score as 63, I have given a 62 and then a 66, I used to have a review for United Abominations which got taken down at some point but I gave 65 for that, if I remember correctly. In my case, the error is very marginal but in other cases, it may not be so.