“Normalized” Reader Reviews

[Mike Barney]

I was looking through the reader reviews, and noticed that some reviewers apparently have never reviewed or owned a piece of gear that had any flaws! :) Wow, what a deal.

On the other hand, wouldn't it be of some value to list their average review grade? I'd generally put more stock in a review that got a 4/5/3.6 than a 5/5/5, the last value being the reviewers average score.

Just a thought.

MikeB

[paul johnson]

Mike, good point. Add in the total number of reviews used in the average. Not sure if the first two number were the range (lo to hi ratings) or if the first number was the number of reviews done.

However, even though this is a good idea, given the fact that decimal values aren't allowed, and let's say someone has only reviewed three "primo" pcs. of gear, which the general consensus from others is that those same three pieces of gear rate between 4.75 and 5, then we might see an avg. of 5 for all three pcs of gear (as many people will round 4.75 up to 5) as well as a fairly valid avg of 5 for that one individual who has only reviewed three pcs. of "primo" gear.

Guess, we would still need to look closely at the gear that the person reviewed. Since BPL is redesigning their website, it would be nice, when in the REVIEWS area, to just click on "something" and show a brief listing of all pcs. of gear reviewed by a person together with the score they gave it. That way, at a glance, i can see if that person reviewed any gear that i'm familiar with and how their rating compared to my own first-hand experience.

Again, good catch on your part.

[Joshua Mitchell]

====
Since BPL is redesigning their website, it would be nice, when in the REVIEWS area, to just click on "something" and show a brief listing of all pcs. of gear reviewed by a person together with the score they gave it. That way, at a glance, i can see if that person reviewed any gear that I'm familiar with and how their rating compared to my own first-hand experience.
====

I gotta say that I think this is a great idea.

[Richard Matthews]

I only review gear that I like. I also have a bunch of gear that is OK, but I continue to search for other alternatives. Just human nature to want to talk about our victories and not our ties.

[Douglas Frick]

>some reviewers apparently have never reviewed or owned a piece of gear that had any flaws

It's an interesting idea, but the big difference is "reviewed" v. "owned". I've owned lots of gear but only post reviews of stuff I really like. Stuff I don't like gets discarded quickly and I forget about it. I might post a "1" if something really annoys me, but regardless the statistic won't be valid.

I like the suggestion above to have a search function to cross-reference other reviews by the same person. That would give a more accurate perspective if needed.

[Sarah Kirkconnell]

Exactly right there. But more so, the gear I don't like is heavy gear ;-) Then again, I don't give everything I love a "5" either.

[J R]

Reviewing gear that doesn't meet the hype? Fails to perform? Demands lowered expectations? Well don't TELL people about it! Heavens no! Just write feel-good reviews and let the poor saps make the same mistakes and find out for themselves!

[Thomas Knighton]

As a newbie, I tend to get more out of negative reviews than positive reviews. I can see what are the issues with the product and see if they are a potential problem for me. When the only bad reviews are people who want a product to do stuff it's not supposed to do well, then I get the feeling that it's a fairly decent product.

If someone does nothing but rave reviews, it doesn't help the newbie like me out at all. I can't tell if a product is truly a good product, or if it just happens to work well for person X. It's actually a bit of a disservice to NOT give a bad review on a poor piece of equipment.

Tom

[Author]

Posts