Low votes in squidoo should be banned!

1 star ratings suck! But are they fair?

I think people should lighten up about the star ratings. Even a low star rating will boost your lensrank (a bit). So any rating is better than NO rating. Disagree? Tell me!

[That said: it does anger me when a good lens that hasn't been voted on yet gets a one star rating without an explanation or something...]

What the stars mean to me

Ratings have meanings

0 stars
Squidoo members did not think the lens was interesting enough to vote on. For non-squidoo members it just meant they couldn't vote.
BTW: star ratings CAN be changed. REALLY. I've done it.1 star
Squidoo members who saw this lens DID think it was interesting enough to vote on, but they hated it.
2 stars
Squidoo members who saw this lens thought it was interesting enough to vote on, but they hated it.
3 stars
Squidoo members who saw this lens thought it was interesting enough to vote on, but they did not like it.
4 stars
Squidoo members who saw this lens did like it, but thought that it could be improved.
5 stars
Squidoo members who saw this lens loved it.

What the stars officially mean

Squidoo says the star ratings mean...

Officially the stars mean the following:

I can do better

Jury's Out

Pretty Darn Good

Splendiferous

Awesometastic

Based on that, only a one-star rating could be seen as an insult. Yet I've seen whole threads in squidu devoted to complaints about low ratings.

Star ratings effect lensrank...

Lensrank explained (really)

Well, squidoo lensrank has, by common consensus (at least) the following factors: Lens freshness. sales made through money making modules like amazon and ebay. visitor numbers. star ratings. favorites. whether you've been blessed by an angel. whethe...

So what do you think: should people give low (1) -star ratings?

Should people give one star ratings at all?

Fetching blurbs now... please stand by

Yes, I want to know when my lens stinks!

Astrieanna says:

If you have a five-star rating system, that gives you five options to say how good you think a lens is. If all you're going to use is 5-star - well, that's limiting things to a "thumbs-up" system - you wouldn't even get a "thumbs-down".

Ratings should be based on merit - is there content there, not just links or products? Do they write understandably (not an overload of grammar mistakes/typos)?
They should not be based on your agreement with the idea (even tho that can be hard to avoid) -- it should be on the quality of the argument.

5-stars should only be used when you finish and don't have anything to add, or any more questions, or anything that needs to be fixed.

1-stars are for spammy lenses or lenses made of a couple linked lists and ebay searches. Something that took 5 minutes to make and doesn't help at all.

Posted June 04, 2009

naturalskinproducts says:

We should be getting ranked based on the impact our lens had on the person doing the rating, and not on how much "heart and soul" or creativity we had to use to make that impact. The truth is, what we've prepared might still be worth very little to one reader yet be exactly what another reader was looking for. On the other hand, rating should not be anonymous. I think our ID should accompany our rating, and I think our ID should show "has rated (this many) lenses; average rating given is(this many) stars." (IE - has rated 7 lenses, average rating 3 stars)

Posted April 08, 2009

JustBon-Crochet-Designs says:

I think I would kinda know if my lenses stink. If someone doesn't like the subject matter, then that's another story. It doesn't mean the lens (or group) stinks though.

Posted March 21, 2009

AdrienneJenkins says:

I rarely use the one star rating but there are a few lenses that look kind of spammy or that people put zero effort in. Usually it's people trying to sell some sort of product and they only have 1 lens on their lensography. I think as lensmasters who are trying to prevent lenses from being banned from Google, we want to keep these lenses out of the spotlight and use the power of the * to do so.

Posted February 07, 2009

Jon_Lyles says:

To me a 2 rating means you need to put more work into it. A 3 rating means the lensmaster did a good job. 4s should go for above average lenses. 5s should go for really exceptional lenses. I've rated lenses at 4 and favorited it. I agree with earlier comments about high ratings given out too easy. If only high ratings are given then the ratings don't mean too much. Seems like almost every site I go to has a overall five rating. On the other hand I agree with Spirituality that sending an email instead of a 1 or 2 would probably do more to help the lensmaster.

Posted January 13, 2009

boshemia says:

Only one person has given me one star ratings on most of my lenses but they weren't voting on the lens, it's really just a game. It would be nice if people weren't allowed to give consistent one star ratings just because they are immature and don't like a person for one reason or another but I'll live... if my lens stinks I'm fine with that but I wish we could block certain people from voting on or even seeing your lenses.

Posted January 05, 2009

Jimmie says:

What's the use of a rating system if the only rating is GREAT? It's totally pointless to me.

Posted October 21, 2008

ParentCoachGTD says:

Seems like the 5s are handed out very easily. Would be cool if the ratings were actually based more on merit. Since so many get fives, it feels like I'd be insulting someone to give them lower. That said, it is hard to picture how this would get going even handedly without some sort of organized Squid campaign to encourage change all at once.

Posted September 17, 2008

KimGiancaterino says:

The rating system itself doesn't bother me, but people who abuse it do. Some top-notch lensmasters have been hurt by 1-star rating campaigns, which I find sad. I never give 1-star ratings, even if I strongly disagree with someone's opinion.

Posted September 15, 2008

Mortira says:

I've only ever given 2 stars once - and that was for a really dismal lens. For me, 3 is a boo, 4 is 'pull your socks up', and 5 is great. I think low ratings are fine, as long as it's not abused. As far as I know, giving multiple 1 star ratings gets you the boot around here. That seems like a fair system to me.

Posted September 07, 2008

No, I don't want to get your negative feedback - it's just so negative!

spirituality says:

Some people do rating exchanges - it's not the norm, but it does happen.
Other than that: we have HQ word on it that even a rating of 1-star gives a lensrank boost, not making it lower. However getting little traffic will get your lens a lower rating, so if the two coincide, you'd get lower ratings and might blame the one star rating. That rating probably wasn't enough to keep lensrank at the high level it had been because of the five star ratings.

Remember: any lensrank boost is temporary, including ratings.

Posted May 01, 2009

sandyspider says:

After a string of 5* ratings and not much traffic, one low rating can easily be push your lens down. I think some people do this out of spite or it is a game. I have never given out a low rating. If I think their lens don't measure up, I might (which I have often) contacted them on how to make improvements. I'm OK if someone does the same for me.

But I do believe the star ratings can be a popularity contest. I have read lenses that I didn't think were up to pare, Yet they had a high number of star 5 ratings. Why? Popularity?

Posted April 30, 2009

Glowbees says:

I like to think Squidoo is an overall "happy" place. People are nice, give "5"'s because we are all just a bunch of cool people, but not so. I shudder to think people rate below a 5 to be weird or spiteful and I think this happens.

Posted April 24, 2009

Mortira says:

I didn't have a problem with the star system until someone decided they didn't like me (or my work?) and 1 starred many of my lenses. I worry about what the lower ratings say to readers about the content they are about to see.

Posted March 20, 2009

Dragon82 says:

I think I've just received 1 stars on several lenses because a person has an issue with the company that helps the Musicians I've listed, and nothing to do with the lens itself. I think people should be forced to leave a comment with a low rating so the rating can be removed if it's not appropriate :(

Posted March 06, 2009

lollyj says:

I'm torn. On one hand, I do want to know what people really think of my efforts. On the other hand, personally, I refuse to give low ratings when someone has put their heart, time, energy into a lens. The stars are just one part of the process. I will NEVER give one star to anyone because each person's creativity takes different forms.

Posted March 05, 2009

cjsysreform says:

Nah. It's not that I don't want negative feedback, but one-star ratings are pretty useless because you don't know who gave it to you or why. I think guestbooks should be a required module for every new lens that gets made; that way we could still say "this lens sucks" but in our own words, and with the option to let the lensmaster know why we don't like it.

Posted March 05, 2009

Heather426 says:

Rather than give a low rating, I usually just move on. but if it is really awful, I will rate it low. Really awful means spelling errors, or only 2 modules or spam or something like that.

Posted March 04, 2009

TheWhistler says:

What is needed is constructive feedback. Leaving just one Star on a lens is just being mean. Tell the person what you would like to see on the lens and help them out.

Posted March 04, 2009

spirituality says:

You can see how many stars people give a lens on the top of it. That's the average, but when you see the average go down, that's a sign of a negative rating.

Did some b* give very good, high rating lenses of yours low votes?

Some people give 1 star ratings to lenses that don't deserve that by any normal measure. Have you experienced that?

Loading poll. Please Wait...

So, should 1-star ratings be banned?

People that give too many 1-star ratings do get their rating-abilities taken away. Should squidoo be more strict in their dealings with 1-star raters?

Should squidoo find a way to filter out undeserved 1-star ratings?

Fetching blurbs now... please stand by

Yes

Mortira says:

It would be great if 1 star ratings could somehow be 'washed out' if they are applied to lenses that have otherwise good ratings.

Posted March 20, 2009

julcal says:

would be great if they could, but do they have the time and the technology? Sounds like quite an undertaking.

Posted March 05, 2009

lollyj says:

The same thing happens on Amazon for the same reason -- often sour grapes. Poor rankings are given to good books by people with a sour outlook. If someone gives ME a one star ranking on Squidoo, I would probably believe my lens stinks. If an excellent giant squid lens receives one star, I would know it was for a negative reason. I think it would be difficult and time consuming to weed out people who deliberately down-rate lenses. I don't have the answer, but Amazon successfully cracked down on sneaky raters so maybe Squidoo can too, somehow.

Posted March 05, 2009

cjsysreform says:

Yes. It shouldn't be allowed. I know people have been saying the ratings system gets abused, with too many 5-star ratings given, but honestly... aren't the best lenses already awarded with more traffic and better feedback? I never look at ratings on lenses as a way to decide whether they're worth reading. Ratings are silly. I'd be in favor of getting rid of them altogether.

Posted March 05, 2009

spirituality says:

Inkserotica: actually they do use the average. I suggested using the median (fine mathematical difference).

Don't let low ratings get you down though!

Posted January 14, 2009

No