Previous_page Next_page
Share |

So just a thought…After looking at these great designs pop up over time, it seems that everyone is just giving their competetion one star so they don’t have good ratings and to make their own look better, so my question is do the ratings even matter? Because they don’t seem to be very accurate.

Idea submitted by jake1 at July 18, 2009

Discuss this idea

This isn't about accuracy necessarily - it is about active engagement and participation in the design process. More than 400 people are registered on the site, so participation is not just limited to the designers, but also to those who vote and comment. Though some might be rating other designs down - as you suggest, people are also providing comment and feedback and I don't think what you are suggesting is necessarily the rule - but more the exception. People can also change their votes if they decide they like newer designs better, and designers can take the comments and criticisms of their peers and submit updated/newer designs - as many as they wish.
Posted Jul 24, 2009 9:07 PM by mdavie

This comment is very true, there was a design that was voted with 5* then after just 2 votes, its average is 3, hence the second vote must be 1*, which i think is very unfair cause compared to some of the other design, it was way ahead in feature.
Posted Jul 25, 2009 11:07 AM by nigelmaj

I'm more worried about people rating their own designs high multiple times, or people rating other designs low multiple times. Like hacking the high scores of a java game, except harder to detect.
Posted Jul 26, 2009 4:07 AM by Critique

Very good point. Tactical voting is not in the spirit of the competition.
Posted Jul 26, 2009 9:07 PM by J Roberts

I would have to agree with these observations. I think it is great to have involvement from as many people as possible, both designing and critiquing proposals, but perhaps it would be best to get rid of a rating system altogether. That would leave comments as the best way to express opinions about each project, rather than an indiscernible rating. Instead of getting a 5* or 1* or a whatever* rating, you would have to actually explain why it is good, or bad, or otherwise. It becomes a much more collaborative effort with more feedback. Also, I believe that the entries shouldn't include the names of the person(s) submitting them, to avoid "retaliation" voting for comments that users might not agree with. These are just ideas for "next time".
Posted Aug 13, 2009 6:08 PM by Blutdrache

What about the idea of making registered users' profiles public, including their voting record? I am thinking this might make people more accountable for their votes - and show what 2 or 3 stars means to one person vs. another. The rating system is necessary for the "winning" aspect, but the value for all participants should be the process - and this might make that process more transparent.....thoughts?
Posted Aug 22, 2009 5:08 PM by annachrism

Sponsored by the Utah Transit Authority, Federal Transit Authority and The University of Utah