Bucky says:
It's been stated already that users will not be able to search by track rating. It may become a secondary filter for awards, but it you could not ask for the tracks with the highest rating.

Anyway I can do a search by awards recived and then select high rating tracks in the list... In that case not allowing a search by rating will be just anoying, because we can do it "manually", but doable.
Or are you meaning we couldn't see the average rating besides awards when listing?

The rating does not tell anything about the track, but about the awards it has received!

Why the hell should it be enabled to sort tracks by their rating if that's just an addition to the awards?

You can filter tracks any way you want. You cannot, however, ask the site to filter by rating. That's been made clear already ...

Trying to incorporate downloads into ratings is something that's not worth the amount of work it takes. There are too many extra situations to account for ...

Here's another novel thought. If you're on the fence about trying a track, just try it. The worst case is you don't like, at which point you can explain why on the track page, and maybe help out the author. That's not too difficult.

Like I keep saying, I don't understand the need for a rating system. It's focus seems to be deciding the opinions of users that are less certain that they want to try a track. It doesn't exist to help the author, just to help users pass judgement on a track before trying it, based on what other users say. Ratings are the opinions of other people. I believe that users should make up their own mind as to how much they like a track, instead of being influenced by the number of stars given by someone of unknown reputability. I can not support a system that would drive users away from a track they would normally try, but it doesn't have enough stars.

The system works the other way, also. It might get users to try a track that they wouldn't normally consider downloading. As much as this is a good thing, there are easier ways to accomplish the same ends without asking users to publicly quantify how much they liked a track. The new random track function is an example.

A rating system is completely superfluous; I don't see a need for it ...

I really want the rating system so here are a few suggestion...

1. The problem is not the rating system, it is to find the best score to give per rating. imo
and 5 should be harder to get becouse that is the highest score. and here is one idea.
5 =.50, 4 =.45, 3 = .40 ,2 = .35 ,1 = .30
********************************************************************************
2. limit ratings to a set per number, say 6, that is total 30 votes, and that is a great score, if you got 50 award and still are on the top, your track is gold..

3. extended limit system: start limit = 6 at award 0-20 and next limit is start at award 21-40 and is 12 and so on ? maybe this would be a diffrent thinking

facts: The limit raise per 20 award 6 12 18 24 30 and so on. (hope you understand)
********************************************************************************
4 i repeat, 5 is a top score and should not be easy to claim, even with free award, and all good track should not have 5 becouse that is saying a track is perfect, and with this limit system it can change the tracks rating over time.

If this is not good sorry but maybe it would bring some new idea anyway

Oh man this is going to take a while, I'll say right now that everything I say about "people" in general is based off what I used to believe/do back when I was a newbie to TMX

@eyebo...
Yes, I know it will be a complement to the awards system and so do you, but do you really think everyone else will realise that too? Do you think that anyone will ever award a track and give it a rating of 1? As you said, people have been rating tracks in awards for years and I don't think I've ever read an award with a low rating, otherwise they wouldn't have awarded it, that's the way people see it. People will use it responsibly, but only with ratings from 3-5 IMO

@spider...
When I was talking about negative ratings I wasn't talking about the new awards rating system, I was talking about way back when people were talking about a seperate ratings system and people's reasons for not having one were that it would give some newcomers negative ratings and they might leave because of it. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Yes, I agree negative ratings in the awards ratings system is rediculous.

I don't understand some of the second part of your post though. I got that there would be a problem with people clicking on the download button thousands of times but the idea is for only registered people to count towards the dl's while others can dl without it counting towards the system. And it's ok, I can make a double post if I have to

@bucky...
Yeah, it only works if it's registered dl's. Not server or non-registered people. About being more trouble than it's worth, that depends on how much you think it's worth. I would value it very highly indeed but you might not bother with it, that's fine. I guess maybe I'm not seeing how hard it really is to implement into the system. I was trying to keep it as simple as possible but even if it gets complicated I still believe it would be a great thing to have.

@eie...
I agree it's *meant* to be nice to newcomers. But if it is nice to newcomers then they'll never improve as their always told their doing well. I guess the difference is you believe that constructive feedback is nice and will keep newcomers here. Well I got given constructive feedback. I even believe it was eyebo himself on PPO and I stopped building because of it, yet again, it was a good thing and I thank (I think it was eyebo) for it. Constructive feedback is negative feedback with a reason attached but it is no different to negative feedback in the way of keeping newbies here. The main point of being able to give a simple -- or 1/5 or whatever is so that they know they need to improve. This is a reply to ville here aswell... It's not telling them to go back to the editor and do it better, it's so they realise they need to look for ways to improve.
Then they know they should ask someone about it (track review thread etc), look up highly rated/awarded tracks to see what people like etc. Negative feedback is used for them to search for constructive feedback, it is not useful by itself. If you think then why not give constructive feedback straight away, well, people are lazy, don't try and change that because I don't think it's ever going to work.

@eyebo's next post...
I did realise that, though it's still very helpful anyway Although when said negative feedback I meant as in 1/5 or -- not "you suck" etc. I also think that constructive comments are still negative, just helpful as well.

@bucky's next post...
I agree with the first 2 paragraphs but with the last one. I think that the awards and comments sections are already enough to give feedback to the author. It's just not enough people use them (too lazy). I believe the problem is that there is not a good enough system to help with track searching, the ratings system is good but we're not allowed to search with it so I believe it's pretty much useless anyway. I suggested the dl/awards because I thought it would be a good search tool. I don't think there is a system that can really help the author and searches. And don't tell me awards do because if they did then we wouldn't have a 29 pg topic.

@ville...
I already answered some of it in the bit @eie. But about the server karma thing. Yes it is mostly for the admins to see but it still helps the trackmaker because...... If you got negative karma you know either your track wasn't for online and you go ask why somewhere, it's bad and you can go ask why somewhere. And if it's good (88/3) then you are already a good builder and then you should be trying new things yourself and building things you think are good because obviously people think like you (assuming you build what you like which most people do) Yes maybe you can still improve but you should try to do that yourself once you get to that stage because others should be spending their time helping newcomers to improve. This is all assuming you know a server where your track is played to check it out. If not then that's why I think a similar system could work on mx, because you can never *force* people to write feedback. For some it's either put a -- or not bother at all and why not give that chance to at least give SOME form of feedback to those people.
Also, I understood your post perfectly, or I think I did

@ skunky, thankyou! Finally, someone agrees hahaha. And if it was just to donators then I would donate just to use it! That might be a good way to get money for the server while helping people too actually. good idea!

@ bucky again....
I didn't ignore you haha... Well, if it shows that someone awards but hasn't downloaded it then it doesn't count towards the ratio. I would have said the +1 to dl's thing that skunky said but sriver found a big flaw in that. It could turn out to be an accurate system but the more accurate you make it the more complicated it is and it's harder for forzzy to implement, still could be VERY ueful IMO

@demens...
I agree very much with the first 3 sentences. But with the rest what bucky said 2 posts after yours.

@ spider...
What skunky said 2 posts after yours.

@ bucky's next post...
I agree. Although a ratings system can be helpful, but I believe this one will not be.

@ skunky...
I agree with everything you said there except that because of what sriver said I think it would be better to make it award without that person dling won't count towards ratio would be better, harder to make, but better. I still think that it could work though and yours was my original thought too. Great minds eh! Also, thanks for condensing my idea and making it more understandable. Why can't I do that

@ sriver...
Very, very good point. Although I agree with what skunky said next, nothing is perfect so what I say is why not simply go as close as you can get and this is the closest I have seen yet to a fair/accurate system, expecially with the thing I said above. although I'm a little bias of course

@ skunky's next post...
Yeah pretty much, except I play online a lot and I believe others on mx do too. I don't think that many play online, see a track they like and go and award it. Or at least I don't because that would mean missing out on time in the next track and I forget the name later.

@ space...
Even without exact numbers you would be able to roughly guess what the numbers were and try to change them. I don't see the point in hiding them, just makes it more complicated. Also, what demens quoted in next post.

@demens next one...
Possibly, but it might not be viewable on the track search page, but if it is then I agree.

@ srivers next post...
Yes but if a track has 5 awards all awards rated 5 IMO that means it's probably better than a track with 20 awards all rated 3.

@ bucky again...
Not worth the ammount of work it takes, yet again, I think it would be, it would save an amazing amount of time IMO. I agree, I agree with just trying it. But the problem is finding one to think about trying in the first place. And random track search isn't a reliable way to search for good tracks. I think a rating system is good to save time searching for good tracks that is more accurate than most awards, and would change every now and again.

@ spider...
I'm sorry but I didn't understand that at all......Although it seems that you are making it harder to get a good rating while it seems everyone here wants a good rating to be easier to give and make it impossible to give a bad rating so ..... I don't get the limits at all though.... although it sounds complicated and people want to keep it simple.

Wow, that's probably my longest one yet hahahaha. Same as usual, feedback welcome etc. Thanks for the many more replies than before, even if half weren't for me. I wonder how close I am to the 30,000 limit? hahahahaha.

I think I'm almost at a dollar now,

Themaniac2

Bucky says:
It doesn't exist to help the author, just to help users pass judgement on a track before trying it, based on what other users say.

One of the reasons I'm sceptical about a voting as well.
But I'm at the point where I say, lets just try it and see what will happen. ^^

SkunkY says:
But I'm at the point where I say, lets just try it and see what will happen. ^^

At least we know something for sure: This thread will became very long... about 30 pages before ratings implemented.
When ratings avaliable we will come here to complain, laught... or maybe for celebrate!
I'm expecting ratings with open mind. Trying not to be sceptical buth neither too optimistic.

There are a bunch of track-trying aids that have yet to be seen on this site. Showcases, PP/PPO, Recommendation threads, a "you might also like ..." section on track pages (was suggested once, might be lost in the massive to do list), favorite authors, etc. My point is that there are a lot of feature that we have yet to see implemented that would really help do exactly what you want to rating system to do, which is find good tracks. The absence of these features now does not necessitate the building of a whole new system.

@ Themaniac2: wow that was much but you only used 9035 character
"Themaniac2 for president 2029"

Yes it should be harder to get 5, but if it is like you say, that all that award a track gives a 5, then i don´t see the error in my "harder to get highest score" system, but a 5 = 5 still, but if somone vote lower, it should be noticed right. ? And that sounds silly to me anyway. (award = 5 (no i say.)I have tryed 100 tracks and maybe one of theme is a five iam not sure, and about download, that is not saying that a track is good. but the award do so, i got that. maybe a good thing afterall dunno.
I have 2 example.
Rocket Science by tuutti got 5 award. (my rate 4 today)
Mosaics by wormi got 28 award. (my rate is maybe a 5 not sure.)

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not
everything that can be counted counts."

Albert Einstein

Bucky says:
There are a bunch of track-trying aids that have yet to be seen on this site. Showcases, PP/PPO, Recommendation threads, a "you might also like ..." section on track pages (was suggested once, might be lost in the massive to do list), favorite authors, etc. My point is that there are a lot of feature that we have yet to see implemented that would really help do exactly what you want to rating system to do, which is find good tracks. The absence of these features now does not necessitate the building of a whole new system.

Exactly. If there's anything that should be changed, it's telling newcomers about these features, for example in the 'Welcome to MX' PM that every user gets after registering on this site. Though, I think if someone is really interested in getting their tracks played by more people, they'll find out themselves sooner or later anyway.