Just received a great suggestion from our active user Brad H. regarding our rating system:
"Your rating system of Awful, Average, Good, Excellent and Best in Town seems unbalanced. For a start, surely professionally prepared food should, on average, be at least 'good'? Why do you suggest that 'average' is in fact less than good? Average (according to the Oxford English Dictionary) means 'medium, of the ordinary standard or kind, typical'. Do we not expect a typical, standard restaurant meal (for which we are probably paying quite a few dollars) to be at least good?
Despite its occasional slang use as meaning 'not great', average really means the norm. Remember, half the population are of below average intelligence. That does not mean that half of us are idiots; by definition, average is the mid-point and half of us are below and half are above. If you or some of your reviewers think average means otherwise, perhaps you should change the word to avoid confusion?
Accepting that 'average' means typical or standard, your ratings don't leave much room for experiences which fall below that. Anything which is less than standard has to be 'Awful' on the ador scale. That seems a little extreme. There will be times when a meal is not of the standard you expect but is not necessarily awful. (Which implies inedible.)
Surely a more balanced rating scale would be something like:
Bad/don't go here
Disappointing/ needs improvement
Good/as expected for the price
This lets reviewers mark down a place which doesn't live up to expectations without totally trashing it."
Brad is probably right. I too find "Awful" & "Best in town" are words too strong for a fair rating system. So what about changing it to:
What do you think?
19/04/2009 05:24 PM
people found this review helpful.