|
jacobea
|
|
|
|
Just curious really (and probably quite nosily of me too  ) how many points/stars do the books in the top ten have to be top ten books? Are they all high fours/fives? Nothing's showing up so i can't even try to see (but nothing show's up under breakdown anyway). Again, just curious.
|
|
datahog
|
|
|
|
This should give you some idea of what it takes...
As I recall there was one month I finished at #8 with a score of roughly 4.3, and more recently I finished the month at #5 with a 4.4, and as of today I'm at 4.5 and sitting at #6, but I just removed a score, giving me a new average score of 4.6 (I'm assuming the SD methodology won't change that average, but you never know), so we'll see tomorrow where that takes me.
The funny thing is the novel that earned me a very good literary agent--albeit, no book sale--struggles to slip into the top twenty. It's the more recent stuff that is obviously appealing to people here.
Tough competition, no doubt about it!
|
|
datahog
|
|
|
|
And hey, I remember you now, Jacobea. Dropped my average one day. But no hard feelings. You must be a better writer than I was at your age, because I wasn't even writing back then, just thinking about it.
In all honesty, the most generous scorers at this site are the strongest writers. Make of that what you will ...
|
|
leighvtwersky
|
|
|
|
The score has to be pretty high to get into the top ten jacobea. my latest was at number 13 yesterday (haven't looked today) with 4.3, so I think at least 4.4. and upwards.
|
|
leighvtwersky
|
|
|
|
It's got a lot tougher. This time last year I was floating around in the lower half of the top ten with an average of 4.1. Now I think that such a score would be somewhere lower down the top twenty.
Hope this helps.
|
|
richie_d
|
|
|
|
I'm at number 20 with an average of 3.9, so everything is bunched up around the top. We're all squeezed in like sardines!
|
|
JDSmith
|
|
|
|
You need a high 4.4 to get in the top ten at the moment.
JD
|
|
Lorraine
|
|
|
|
I have a suggestion to ease the log jam and clarify the ranking system. At the moment we can only grade from one to five in each category. I don’t know how others feel, but there are times when something is too good for a four, but doesn’t really deserve a five. Rather than downgrade a writer, I tend to give the five rather than the four. I would like to see a grading system of one to ten (or more) in each category. This would allow for nuances in marking. I would be happier giving an eight out of ten, which would be a true reflection of how I felt, rather than a four or five.
The ABC Checklist for New WritersVisit my website: Lorraine Mace
|
|
Bagpuss123
|
|
|
|
Quote: Lorraine, Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 10:26I have a suggestion to ease the log jam and clarify the ranking system. At the moment we can only grade from one to five in each category. I don’t know how others feel, but there are times when something is too good for a four, but doesn’t really deserve a five. Rather than downgrade a writer, I tend to give the five rather than the four. I would like to see a grading system of one to ten (or more) in each category. This would allow for nuances in marking. I would be happier giving an eight out of ten, which would be a true reflection of how I felt, rather than a four or five. I made the same suggestion a few months ago, Lorraine. There were one or two takers, but after that it faded into obscurity. I'm all for it.
|
|
JDSmith
|
|
|
|
Quote: Lorraine, Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 10:26I have a suggestion to ease the log jam and clarify the ranking system. At the moment we can only grade from one to five in each category. I don’t know how others feel, but there are times when something is too good for a four, but doesn’t really deserve a five. Rather than downgrade a writer, I tend to give the five rather than the four. I would like to see a grading system of one to ten (or more) in each category. This would allow for nuances in marking. I would be happier giving an eight out of ten, which would be a true reflection of how I felt, rather than a four or five. I think there have been suggestions of this before. I agree, Lorraine. I feel many times that I would like to score in between marks.
JD
|
|
tomkeal
|
|
|
|
Quote: Lorraine, Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 10:26I would like to see a grading system of one to ten (or more) in each category. This would allow for nuances in marking. I would be happier giving an eight out of ten, which would be a true reflection of how I felt, rather than a four or five. I don't think it's a good idea to try to introduce nuances into the marking scheme. At least with only five options most people have a fairly clear understanding of what each grade means. With 10 options the reviewing will become more subjective, as it will be more dependent on the reviewer's personal calibration about what each grade means (not to mention their mood on that particular day, which way the wind is blowing, etc.). Tom
|
|
Kasia
|
|
|
|
i also suggested this a while back, The problem with any rating scale that is an odd number is the tendency to gravitate to the middle. An even number forces you to make a choice and may help to space out the charts.
|
|
missmorston
|
|
|
|
No rating scale should be an even number - it should be either 5, 7 or 11. Raising it to 7 might be a bit of help, but ten wouldn't work - if you want to pick 'average' would you choose 4, 5 or 6? People would complain that there was no 5.5  Statistically it doesn't work either. I would go for 7 though 
Stop the sketch - it's too silly
|
|
Chronomodra
|
|
|
|
Quote: tomkeal, Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 12:47Quote: Lorraine, Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 10:26I would like to see a grading system of one to ten (or more) in each category. This would allow for nuances in marking. I would be happier giving an eight out of ten, which would be a true reflection of how I felt, rather than a four or five. I don't think it's a good idea to try to introduce nuances into the marking scheme. At least with only five options most people have a fairly clear understanding of what each grade means. With 10 options the reviewing will become more subjective, as it will be more dependent on the reviewer's personal calibration about what each grade means (not to mention their mood on that particular day, which way the wind is blowing, etc.). Tom Except grading is already subjective. I recently received a review from someone who gave me mostly 4's, and when I talked about the review with him later, he said that he's so sick of the 'inflated' scores on the site, he refuses to give 5's except in very rare instances. This compared to others who will give straight 5's just because they enjoyed reading a piece, regardless of any glaring faults. Having a wider range of grading options allows for a wider range of scores, which means we wouldn't all be bunched up as much. With a requirement of 4.4 to get in the top ten, that pretty much means your work had to be assigned (by chance, mostly) to a lot of the 'generous' reviewers, and not to any of the 'stingy' ones. A wider range would reduce that luck factor, in my opinion.
This post was last edited by Chronomodra, 27 Aug 2008, 14:56
----------------------------- -Chro Author of Blades of the Fallen and The Spirit ShifterAnd blogger of Journey of the Scribe
|
|
sophiemp
|
|
|
|
Quote: Chronomodra, Wednesday, 27 Aug 2008 14:55Having a wider range of grading options allows for a wider range of scores, which means we wouldn't all be bunched up as much. With a requirement of 4.4 to get in the top ten, that pretty much means your work had to be assigned (by chance, mostly) to a lot of the 'generous' reviewers, and not to any of the 'stingy' ones. A wider range would reduce that luck factor, in my opinion. Either that or your work has to be really good.
|
Stupid Question Really
27 Aug 2008, 01:09
