GR Rating system discussion

GR have avg rating for most books in 3 to 5 range. This does not give an accurate idea. What can b done? Can something like IMDB type can be done? It has 10 point rating system which gives better idea about movies. Just thinking. If you agree mail to GR to change to 10 point system.

I agree that I often find a 5-point system restrictive, but the problem I find with IMDB's 10-point system is that it seems heavily weighted on the negative. My personal 10-point system is, I feel, more evenly balanced. The numbers in parenthesis is now I equate it to Goodreads (1st number) and Amazon's (2nd number) 5-star systems:
10 - Excellent - A top read; lacked any noticeable flaws (5/5)
9 - VG+ - Close to excellent; only one or two small quibbles (4/5)
8 - VG - Enthused about it; very well done (4/4)
7 - G+ - Enjoyed it very much; would recommend (3/4)
6 - Good - Enjoyed the book; might recommend (3/3)
5 - Okay - Enjoyed it but with significant reservations. Only okay. (2/3)
4 - Poor - Wasn't awful, but wasn't good. Finished it with difficulty (1/2)
3 - NR - Did not work for me. Would not recommend to others (1/1)
2 - DNF - Awful. Read more than 50 pages but did not finish (1/1)
1 - DNS - So badly done it did not even survive the 50-page test. (1/1)

Lots of people have demanded half stars and Goodreads won't change their ways. Not too accurate. Big difference between 3 and 4 stars.

I agree there is a big difference between 3 and 4 stars. I struggle with the difference between 2 and 3. I rarely give a book 5 stars.

2 means it is OK. Three means you liked it.

I believe if I finish the book and loved it, it is a 5, the author did their job. If I liked it a lot, it is a 4. If the book was just okay, then i give it a 3. I don't like to give 1 or 2 but I do if it warrants it. 2 for a book I made it through but it was challenging.1 is for those books that I could or would not finish usually. Sometimes I think would be better with a 1-10 system but I am okay with it like it is. I guess we have to be.

LJ wrote: "I agree that I often find a 5-point system restrictive, but the problem I find with IMDB's 10-point system is that it seems heavily weighted on the negative. My personal 10-point system is, I feel,..."

I dont undersatnd meaning of 4/4 or 3/3 or 1/2. What u mean by that.

Jamie wrote: "Lots of people have demanded half stars and Goodreads won't change their ways. Not too accurate. Big difference between 3 and 4 stars."
yes i am v frustrated. It is very difficult to differentiate between good, average, bad, worst and best books. One of the main reason to come to goodreads is to have a firsthand idea about books before starting. Same like IMDB. IMDB gives fairly good idea about movies. whereas GR is very poor in that.

Cindy wrote: "I agree there is a big difference between 3 and 4 stars. I struggle with the difference between 2 and 3. I rarely give a book 5 stars."

yes i am v frustrated. It is very difficult to differentiate between good, average, bad, worst and best books. One of the main reason to come to goodreads is to have a firsthand idea about books before starting. Same like IMDB. IMDB gives fairly good idea about movies. whereas GR is very poor in that.

Jamie wrote: "2 means it is OK. Three means you liked it."

Still avg rating is between 3 and 4

yes i am v frustrated. It is very difficult to differentiate between good, average, bad, worst and best books. One of the main reason to come to goodreads is to have a firsthand idea about books before starting. Same like IMDB. IMDB gives fairly good idea about movies. whereas GR is very poor in that.

Folks I am not talking about your personal ratings. That is pretty accurate as per your perspective. Ppl give 1 or 3 or 4 stars and i understand that either it worked for you or not. But the average rating at top is a big problem.

True, I do give a lot of 4-5 ratings because I pick books hoping to be pleased and usually are and it is true there is a great variety of of differences just between 4-5 in most case. I don't think Goodreads, LibraryThing, Amazon, or any place else will change. It doesn't frustrate me, I just make sure I talk up the the review accordingly.

According to Goodreads, 4 out of 5 stars means you really liked the story, whereas 5 means it was outstanding. Keep in mind everyone has different tastes for stories like clothes, cars or food. And yes, that makes the written review all the more important to convey what you liked or disliked about the story or how it compared to other books the author has done or other similar types of stories.

I have seen people literally almost come to blows arguing over the merits of a novel. Half love it while the other half hate it. "Koko" by Peter Straub is an example. I really liked the novel "All the Pretty Dead Girls" by John Manning, but many did not feel the same way. Same with "Altar of Bones" by the mysterious Philip Carter. You should always write a detailed review. But surprisingly, most people are too lazy to do so. It falls on us to be better because this information is too important to prospective readers and especially to the author. It takes a great deal of work & thought to put a book together, So have the decency to rate & review the story properly.

I think the average rating being near the top is because most of us here on GR have developed friends who's reviews influence our reading choices. It's not like just going to the bookstore anymore and trying to find a good one. I remember those days, and believe me, I'd have a lot more 1 or 2 star ratings. Also, I've always understood a 2 star to mean I didn't like it. Even if we can't have a half star rating I usually put them in my review. Just my opinion :)

Ratings are meant to give a general idea. There is no way to distinguish a 3-star book from a 4-star book. So, I would definitely avoid a 2-star book. But I would read the review for 3-star and 4-star books to find out what the reader liked or didn't like. But a more complex rating system would be tedious.

I agree with Adite. Just talk up the reviews and explain more of what you liked or didn't like.

Rajan wrote: "Cindy wrote: "I agree there is a big difference between 3 and 4 stars. I struggle with the difference between 2 and 3. I rarely give a book 5 stars."

yes i am v frustrated. It is very difficult to..." Lately I have found that IMDB ratings are very misleading. Some 8+ rated movies sucked big time whereas the 5+ were more watchable. So, I go by the book/movie synopsis and check out what is the general consensus. Sure we all have different tastes in books and movies. And it's all a bit chancy.

I was referring to the tedious nature of having 1/2 stars or 10 stars. 5 stars is enough to get your point across if you elaborate in your review.

Debbie "DJ" wrote: "I think the average rating being near the top is because most of us here on GR have developed friends who's reviews influence our reading choices. It's not like just going to the bookstore anymore ..."

2 stars on Goodreads means it was OK but only OK. 1 star basically means shit.

Good discussion.

I have used a four star system for rating films I have reviewed on radio, but the rating follows the review. People get information and opinion in the actual review. A rating system provides guidance but the reviewers comments are more important, I think. Having said that, I quite like IMDb's 10 scale. I have found, for me, that anything below 6.2 is usually not worth watching.

For GR the five star scale is actually quite good because it obliges us to decide whether a book is worthwhile - three and above, or disappointing - two and below. I agree with many posters that it is hard on occasion to decide between two and three, three and four, but that is when our comments come into play.

Very thoughtful thread Rajan.

I don't depend only on star ratings and usually read a few reviews and it gives you a clear idea about the book. But, there hasn't been an instance where I've picked up a book solely based on GR's ratings or reviews.
For picking up books, I browse book stores.

As for 10 point rating system, I don't think it would make much of a difference. Most books that get 1 or 2 stars now will land in 4 or 5 category and the ones that get 4 and 5 will land in 8-10 category.

Jigar wrote: "I don't depend only on star ratings and usually read a few reviews and it gives you a clear idea about the book. But, there hasn't been an instance where I've picked up a book solely based on GR's ..."

The veteran reader understands this is the wise way to go. Many books are overrated & some are underrated. This is why reviews are so important. Lazy readers simply do a quick star click. Those with critical analysis skills that care enough about stories will go the extra mile & take the necessary time to review a book properly. Your review has more power with prospective readers & to the author concerned since only a quarter to a fifth of raters will bother to do this. Smart readers will read a few reviews before deciding to take on a book while keeping in the back of their mind the rating average-a secondary concern.

Half stars should be there. What i do is i give 4 stars and mention that my rating 3.5 in the review, likewise

I had thought 1-5 stars was plenty but lately I am leaning towards 10 stars Half stars get lost in the description or review sometimes.