Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-5294711-20150731173229/@comment-28857013-20150805123832

Meta07 wrote: Logologologol wrote: Ummm... It's not like the ratings had ever been consistent like this in the first place?

As demonstrated by Tasty, some of us really do weigh the criteria differently. And to begin with it's not like we all have a set standard of the said criteria.

It hadn't, but that's why we are changing. How it has always been is not always the best path. As an official critic, you don't just represent your own opinions but also the wiki's, so sadly I can not just let every official critic uses his/her own rating system anymore.

By the way, this is just my personal concern, but... if you are fighting for  completely changing the rating system  because one critic's opinions may be different from another, why are you opposing the "Epicness" criterion because it "promotes critical bias" so aggressively? I know the "Epicness" criterion may be silly, but it just bugs me... I'm not the one who opposed, you know.

Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean by having a critic representing the whole wiki. Critics have varying opinion, and so does the whole community. If you really are concerned about no having the most fair opinion, then let several critics rate and average the score.

The weight system was just a suggestion I made as I see you guys having varying opinion on which criteria to be considered. I'm not trying to underline bold "completely change the system", just seeing if loosening the boundaries solve these a bit. If you don't like, I'll take it back.