Get our newsletter
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to get the scoop on Seattle restaurants.
Welcome to the Urbanspoon Message Board. View all topics
Urbanspoon rating system
|
Ben |
Urbanspoon is thinking of adding a middle rating value between "like it" and "don't like it". Do you think this is a good idea? If so, what should we call it? Our current candidates include (not in order of preference) "so-so", "meh", "mixed", "been there", "neutral". Discuss. |
12 replies
|
JasonTrue |
Some form of neutral would be desirable to me... There are at least 80 places I don't feel strongly enough about to rate negatively, but wasn't impressed enough to rate positively.Lacking neutralness, I've gone with "thumbs down" plus a review with more specifics on a place that I was slightly disappointed in.I'm not sure what I'd call it, either. "Been there", "neutral" or "mixed feelings" are the most accurate for me; a neutral vote means that I probably wouldn't suggest a place, but I'd go along if someone wanted to go there. |
|
|
adamac |
It seems like a weakness in the current system is that there is no way to express strong liking. This means that there are some restaurants that many people like (but not many love) that get a very high ranking.My personal rating system has 4 levels: poor, passable, good, great. I think you could modify your rating system to be "I don't like it", "meh.", "I like it", and "I love it." I'm not sure how this would affect your "X percent like it" system, but it seems like it would allow for more differentiation between great and simply popular restaurants. |
|
Barney |
Hurrah! been wanting for this for a while! I agree that I'm often struggling to say "I like it" when I have some concerns, nor do I like "I don't like it" for something nagging me about the place... often not even food related. I too would like a way to differentiate between "I like it" and "I love it".Back to your question, while I like "meh", it might be lost on many. Of your other options, "so-so" is my favorite, "netral" would work. How about "undecided", "can take-it or leave-it", "edible", "passable".Just don't know how you're going to incorporate this with all of your data in place.... guess it work as long as everyone can go back and update their resto's.When you get done with this excercise, let's talk more about giving me a "Shill?" voting button to go with my "Recommend this review" button! |
|
LauraMac |
Spork. |
|
DrD |
Isn't that the same as simply not voting?If you start adding gradations, there will never be enough to please everyone.I like your binary system just fine. |
|
|
Barney |
I disagree that you shouldn't vote if you don'e "love it" or "hate it". If I looked at a resto with only 2 votes, is it because it's really average (nobody voting love it or hate it), or nobody has eaten there? If on the other hand, I see 30 "really average" votes, or the indicator saying 30 people have voted and the satisfaction rating is 50%, I can make a decision about if it's worth a try. Otherwise I'm deciding to try someplace really average thinking that it is merely untried. More information is better! Dumbing it down helps nobody! |
|
cameron anderson |
honestly, i think that complicating the rating system would flaw it, even if just adding a neutral rating. adding more options makes the ratings more subjective to each individual, making it more confusing for everyone else. i'd like to compare it to spice ratings at thai restaurants. a lot of places use a star rating for dish spiciness, but it's always subjective to the restaurant. 3 stars, 4 stars, 5 stars, whatever! whenever i order anywhere, i say mild, medium, or hot. this is a universal gauge and no server is ever confused by what i mean. in regards to the urbanspoon rating system, the places i like are restaurants i would visit again happily, places i don't like are places i would either not visit or only visit under certain circumstances. if you want to really vouche or explain your rating, write up a comment! that's what the comment box is for. urbanspoon, please don't add frivolous ratings! |
|
|
darthbunni |
I gotta say I like the binary system too. If the restaurant did not move me to like or dislike, I leave it be. I agree that comments are the way to go, it tells me more than even a ton of average or even "love it" votes. |
|
|
Ben |
What if you could click a button saying you had been at a restaurant recently. Maybe your click would only count once per 24 hour period. So instead of a middle vote of neutral, voting is only for strongish opinions. The restaurant page could have a new stat saying something like "urbanspooners have eaten here XXX times in the last (year, month, or something)". On your votes/restaurants tab, it would show how many times you have eaten at each of your restaurants. Then we could also expose cool stats in your profile page about which cuisines, neighborhoods, etc. you eat at most often. Would this be appealing? Would you bother to come back to the site to click the "been there" button very often after eating somewhere? Would you prefer this AND the middle vote, one or the other, or neither? Discuss further. |
|
|
Barney |
While I like stats, I suspect that only a core few will click every time they eat somewhere. I agree with other folks that too complicated is a bad thing. I would still prefer the middle vote to this. Here's a neat and somewhat unrelated thought... how about putting an indicator next to my icon when I make a rating to show how much I like or hate everything! That way, when I look at someone's review, I can see graphically if they tend to like or hate stuff. Obviously, it works better for folks with more than one resto rated... so maybe it's also a good indicator of a "hater" or "shill". |
|
Kate |
I like the idea of a middle option, because as dh said above, it gives you an idea of whether the restaurant doesn't have votes because nobody's tried it, or if it's because everyone's meh about it. As far as the terms I like "mixed" because it seems the most specific word to state that there are a mix of good things and bad things about the restaurant. Regarding the idea of a fourth "I love it" option, I don't think this is necessary because of the "favorite" feature. You should already know who loves it by who has favorited it. |
|
MMAD |
I like that ideamost places I go are fine: not awful, not fantastic.I'd love to save the "I like it" for places I "really" like |