Joined: 12/26/2006
Posts: 256
Location: United States of America
Since players' movie ratings are now shown in the forum profile, reputations are at stake. Making an individual's ratings public adds accountability, which is definitely a good idea.
Some have made the point that public ratings will create "peer pressure". Members of the community should be repeatedly and forcefully instructed not to "pressure" others to rate a certain way or to inapproriately criticize another's ratings. But in the absence of this, if one is afraid of expressing his/her opinion because it's not popular, then that's really the individual's problem, not the result of "peer pressure".
Here's an example: I rated nitsuja's Sonic Advance movie a 4 out of 10 for entertainment, which a lot of people are certainly going to disagree with. Does that change my opinion? Try flaming me and see. ; )
Peer pressure will influence votes if they are public.
To say that they won't is looking beyond human nature. To give an example of one person who won't change their rating is not an argument that holds water.
If ratings are made public, they might as well just be removed, because they will be meaningless.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
For people who still don't quite understand why peer pressure can effect this... well, here is a answer taken from a 2channel interview on a wikipedia article on why 2ch is entirely anonymous (unless the poster designates himself/herself a name):
Wikipedia wrote:
Q: Why did you decide to use perfect anonymity, not even requiring a user name?
A: If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.
Joined: 11/14/2005
Posts: 1057
Location: United States
All ratings should be made public, that goes for submission votes too. The only reason any person should be scared to vote/rate is if the person knows they are voting/rating a movie incorrectly or for the wrong reason. If you truly feel justified in your rating of a movie, then why do you care if other people know it? No one will crucify a user for his or her rating, as long as there is a good reason behind it.
Also, if people can just vote with anonymity, there is a much greater chance of abuse. It only takes one person to completely screw up a movie's rating, especially if they give it a 1/1.
Also, if people can just vote with anonymity, there is a much greater chance of abuse. It only takes one person to completely screw up a movie's rating, especially if they give it a 1/1.
No one's done that so far, and we've been using the anonymity system....
Hooray for a great track record of not abusing the rating system! \o\
Joined: 12/26/2006
Posts: 256
Location: United States of America
Respectfully, I strongly disagree with JXQ Vidar.
Vidar, it seems to me that you took Wikipedia's quote out of context to prove your point, which I feel is dishonest; consequently, I feel quite insulted by your post.
Q: Why did you decide to use perfect anonymity, not even requiring a user name?
A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other.
The rest of the material quoted by Vidar follows. The Wikipedia article can be found here.
The way in which I believe your quote misrepresented the speaker's intent is as follows: when asked why posts are anonymous, the primary answer, given first, was that the anonymity is designed to prevent retribution in response to an individual's divulging sensitive, privledged, or secret information. This practice occurs all the time in journalism, yet the situation described is far outside the scope of any activity taking place on this site. The other material you quoted is only secondary, "adding on" to the primary argument.
The arguments presented, while valid, are, I believe, against principle. Favoritism and submission to peer pressure are, whether "human nature" or not, weaknesses. And let's face it: the TASVideos site, however nice it may be, is a pretty unimportant part of one's life in the greater scheme of things. If someone, in the face of criticism from people he/she hardly even knows on the internet of all places, cannot stand up for his/her opinion about something as trivial as rating a tool-assisted speedrun video, then that person simply has no place rating movies here. Period.
Arguing moral principle is undoubtedly a losing battle here, but there are far superior ways to address the phenomenon of peer pressure than for the site to act as an enabler for weak-minded ones.
Lots of edits:
My post generated a lot of healthy discussion on the IRC channel, which is always a good thing.
About Vidar's quote: Vidar said that he omitted the first part of the quote because it was not relevant to TASVideo's activities. Understanding this made me feel considerably less insulted. I, however, still found the quote misleading because it lends 2channel's authority to an anonymity policy without disclosing that quite different circumstances are involved.
Neither of my posts were intended to convey the impression that I believe that peer pressure doesn't exist. It certainly exists, but, in my opinion, its existance does not justify an anonymous rating policy. Peer pressure can be addressed.
A rating system is only useful if the ratings can be trusted. This is why someone who is vulnerable to peer pressure shouldn't rate movies. Otherwise, that individual's rating becomes, not the individual's opinion, which would certainly be valid, but merely an inflation of the "popular opinion". My solution is: rather than forsake the accountability that comes with public ratings (which accountability is necessary now that movie ratings are linked to players' profiles), the community should get active about enforcing a "stand by your opinion" policy. In other words, since changing ratings per peer pressure (as opposed to hearing something that changes one's mind) invalidates the rating system, the community should strongly encourage individuals to stick to their opinions in spite of criticism. If this is done with the same forcefulness used when telling others not to request ROMs, for example, the result would be a rating system that is both integer and accountable.
Another thing: our IRC discussion showed that disagreement can take place without turning into a flamewar or hurting feelings. I'm quite proud of this.
If someone, in the face of criticism from people he/she hardly even knows on the internet of all places, cannot stand up for his/her opinion about something as trivial as rating a tool-assisted speedrun video, then that person simply has no place rating movies here. Period.
I love this retort - the "What we are debating is so trivial in the grand scheme of things, so let's just do it the way I want to do it!" retort.
As you were told many times on IRC, someone being easily influenced by peer pressure is still allowed to vote their opinion. Why do you think votes for elections are secret ballots? Perhaps to get the most unbiased results? What qualities do you think would constitute someone as having the "right" to vote?
Deep Loner wrote:
there are far superior ways to address the phenomenon of peer pressure than for the site to act as an enabler for weak-minded ones.
Please, share one of your ideas that gives an equally unbiased result as anonymity. Remember that (1) not everyone would rate things the exact same way you would, and (2) they are still allowed to rate things.
Response to your edit: So you think that it is easier to change human nature than it is to put anonymity on the site?
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
There has always been a disclaimer on the rating page that says "Ratings are not anonymous", so everyone who has given ratings has already accepted that their ratings may become public. If all ratings were made public this instant, I think I would have no right to complain that I should have been given a choice about it. Moreover, arguments that people will rate less accurately because of the change don't make much sense, because people already are giving ratings as if their ratings are publically available... unless they didn't bother to read the rating guidelines, in which case they probably wouldn't be paying enough attention to notice anything change either.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Wow, I never thought that people really cared this much about ratings (rather subjective ones at that). I am glad that it has fostered some good discussion, and after reading through everyone's thoughts I agree with points made from both sides, but I still never imagined the flood gates would open like this.
I don't see a reason to adjust personal votes to other's votes. Maybe it just me.
Just look at the workbench. Anyone voting "No" on a popular submission is instantly attacked for their opinion.
This could also happen with ratings.
Personally, I do not mind (and would also like to be able to share mine). However, I respect that some others do not share my opinon. I would rather have it set to a personal option, defaulting to off.
I would actually enjoy being questioned about my particular ratings of a movie if someone thought they were strange or too conformitive. It would force me to rethink my opinion on the movie and either a) conclude that my opinion was originally right or b) that I misrated due to laziness in watching the movie/current mood.
But again, I can very easily see why others would not want their votes shared.
Joined: 5/2/2006
Posts: 1020
Location: Boulder, CO
Nitsuja put it best I think.
Honestly, I think it could be a good thing if someone downvoted and had a good reason; It might spark a good discussion as to what is wrong with the movie.
Joined: 12/26/2006
Posts: 256
Location: United States of America
I'll just briefly address a few points that were brought up, and then I'll close my argument.
meepers, a.k.a. Vidar, in the IRC channel brought up the question of: what does "I respect your opinion" really tell someone?
I'm pleased that such fervent discussion has been able to take place, both here and on IRC, without any personal attacks, verbal abuse, or other inapproriate behavior taking place. It really shows the dignity of the TASVideos community, and it makes me proud to be a part of it. Respecting one's opinion is respecting one's right to disagree. Saying, "I respect your opinion" (and then practicing it) tells the other person that one will not trample the other's boundries with aforementioned personal attacks, verbal abuse, etc. Not respecting others' opinions is what we see in the more unsavory exchanges here and on IRC.
I can't emphasize enough how delightful it is to see such strong opinions (and probably also feelings) being exchanged in such a civilized manner. For this reason, I don't anticipate personal strains with anybody here, including Fabian, Vidar/meepers, and JXQ.
JXQ wrote:
Invoking a "don't give in to peer pressure" policy won't work any more here than it did in middle school. It's not just difficult, it's impossible.
I disagree that this is "impossible" or even that difficult. But it is a valid concern. If peer pressure really affects movie ratings that substantially (which it might), then changes definitely need to be made, but anonymous ratings are not the answer. The main thrust of my argument before was that, since movie ratings are shown in a player's profile, they will much more seriously affect reputations than before, and such a system demands the accountibility of public ratings. I truly believe that someone who changes ratings just because others disagree (again, not saying that it doesn't happen) has no business rating movies in the first place*, because 1) it corrupts the integrity of the system, and 2) it's just plain wrong. This is also why I support the policy that newcomers can't vote on submissions right away.
If JXQ's situation becomes reality (again, which it might), then the solution, rather than hiding individual users' ratings, would be either to remove movie ratings from the profile pages or abolish the now-dysfunctional rating system altogether.
Unless anybody has questions, I will now rest my case and let the remaining discussion take its course.
*This refers to the situation where a valid opinion is changed for no reason other than the opinions of others. I want to add here that not all "peer pressure" is bad. For example, if someone rates movies all ones because "I hate JXQ" or some similarly invalid reason, peer pressure that causes that one to remove or modify such ratings would in this case have a positive effect on the integrity of the system. For this reason, I propose also that the ratings of defrocked users be automatically removed from the system.
I disagree that this is "impossible" or even that difficult.
The thing is, there is no tool to forcedly "depressurize" people, or even diagnose the presence of peer pressure, since it's up to each individual person and their social position and skills.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
I couldn't have said it better than Kyrsimys and hero already did.
All ratings should be public, as it would mainly help against abuse which is a good thing.
People who rate movies objectively wouldn't care about their ratings being published. We are a open community, so there is no reason to hide such things.
Those who have a problem with their rating being published, shouldn't rate at all then.
If we are such an open community, why is it so often that someone who votes no on a very popular movie gets labeled as "hater" and frowned upon? You shouldn't forget that such a situation, when a player finds his run in other user's table with exceptionally low rating, won't be very rare. The attitude towards that user might change for the worse as a result. I know not everyone is sensitive like that, and not everyone rates the movies much lower than the average, but I still wouldn't want such things to happen, as it might hurt the integrity of the community.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
