Alternative rating method?

[burtz]

ok, let's not change the current rating system, but could we just post a table of trackers according to content and speed or etc. so that those who does NOT have the Top level trackers knows why in the end, it's all about contents and quality not rarity.

totally agree. the WIAW thread format itself could really be misleading for beginners. it would be much better if it is formatted in a better way.

just a scrap from tracker-invites i think.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|Tracker|Type     |Content| Spd | Rarity| PT  | RELEASES      
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|       |         |       |     |       |     | 
|ScT    |0day     |   5   | 5   |   5   |  4  | SCENE
|TL     |0day     |  4.5  | 4.5 |   2   |  4  | SCENE
|BitMe  |ELearning|   5   | 3   |   3   |  NA | SCENE/NONSCENCE
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

i think this way, the user viewing the page wouldn't have to dig the all those individual reviews. it is then up to the user if he wants to trade his 1000TB buffered TL for an FTN or FWTR invite or just be contented with what he has. it would help the user relax with his torrent-life rather than buffering an account for trade like a madman thinking that he could get better FILES at much rare trackers but in the end, would be disappointed because he couldn't get an invite in a tracker where in reality, just has the same content. bottomline, this would also make them wiser not too offer way too much for a, SOMETIMES, a rare BUT content-wise WORTHLESS tracker (multiple lower-level tracker accounts owner doesn't get harassed and top-level tracker inviter would have less chances of abusing).

just my opinion.

if scene groups themselves were kind enough to give us what they worked for, why can't we do the same thing with our invites?

peace out! cheers!

[Thatsgreat]

Well this ranking wouldn't be about how rare the invite is or how hard it is to get the tracker. This would be about how good the tracker is. So TL may be level 8 and UK-T may be level 4. So what's the point of having this ranking-system? If you want to know how good the tracker is there is a scale from 1-10 in the What Invites Are Worth thread next to the tracker.

[optimus_prime]

as said, invites ranking should stay as it is. it is invites ranking.
if you need quality top list i can give it to you: ftn, sct, tl, bitme, bitmetv and oink are good others are mediocre. you're free to spread that on table with 10 levels and make it look serious
so, once again, it's about supply/demand and not about quality. i hate picasso and i think his paintings sucks, that doesn't mean i expect sotheby's to rewrite catalogue and say "pablo picasso - crap - 1.99$".

[Buggyme]

as said, invites ranking should stay as it is. it is invites ranking.
if you need quality top list i can give it to you: ftn, sct, tl, bitme, bitmetv and oink are good others are mediocre. you're free to spread that on table with 10 levels and make it look serious
so, once again, it's about supply/demand and not about quality. i hate picasso and i think his paintings sucks, that doesn't mean i expect sotheby's to rewrite catalogue and say "pablo picasso - crap - 1.99$".

Well said. It should stay sorted by trading value based on supply and demand. People who only care about the tracker's other attributes can simply just look at the number inside []. If it has a low value, then using their own judgment they can simply say, "Ok, I don't give a shit about rarity, I only care about its content and speed, so I will only use the number inside the [] as my guide for my trading activities, as opposed to the rarity."

Most people here probably care more about rarity because if they get a 'rarer' site, because they can then have more options on what site they can get. Notice that, if people don't care about rarity, then in theory, the rarity level should equal the tracker (content/speed/pretime) rating, but clearly most people do care about rarity.

UK-T can probably get you a whole lot of excellent sites even though its content and speed are not of good quality. Why? Because if you have it, you can trade it for pretty much anything you want. But some people don't want this 'power', they just want a good tracker that they can leech from. And that's cool, just look at the number inside the [], and trade based on that number. Simple.

[KFlint]

as said, invites ranking should stay as it is. it is invites ranking.
if you need quality top list i can give it to you: ftn, sct, tl, bitme, bitmetv and oink are good others are mediocre. you're free to spread that on table with 10 levels and make it look serious
so, once again, it's about supply/demand and not about quality. i hate picasso and i think his paintings sucks, that doesn't mean i expect sotheby's to rewrite catalogue and say "pablo picasso - crap - 1.99$".

Well said. It should stay sorted by trading value based on supply and demand. People who only care about the tracker's other attributes can simply just look at the number inside []. If it has a low value, then using their own judgment they can simply say, "Ok, I don't give a shit about rarity, I only care about its content and speed, so I will only use the number inside the [] as my guide for my trading activities, as opposed to the rarity."

Most people here probably care more about rarity because if they get a 'rarer' site, because they can then have more options on what site they can get. Notice that, if people don't care about rarity, then in theory, the rarity level should equal the tracker (content/speed/pretime) rating, but clearly most people do care about rarity.

UK-T can probably get you a whole lot of excellent sites even though its content and speed are not of good quality. Why? Because if you have it, you can trade it for pretty much anything you want. But some people don't want this 'power', they just want a good tracker that they can leech from. And that's cool, just look at the number inside the [], and trade based on that number. Simple.

exactly!

But it would be really cool to have another list like burtz did because it is easy to understand for noobs and very usefull for anyone into trading


If someone want to make a draft at such a list for all the trackers listed in the WIAW and present it to us, it would be a good start. It has to be made by someone who know most of these trackers, personnaly, i lack too much info to do such a list...

[burtz]

@KFlint

yeah, i really am waiting for a list like this because whatever we may personally think, trading decisions would still come from traders. all FST could surely provide is more info on the trackers to guide traders.

OFFTOPIC: i see that you're a guitar player too, would you mind sharing some private lessons with me?