R U With Changing The Ratio Methhod?

[Sawyer2020]

I vote for new way but its not that easy like 1man said but
we all make rarity for sites
well if I want for example SCT and other one want bitmetv
and we did swap we will be both happy after
thats all we both not looking for levels but what we want and what we get
right !!!!!!!!!

[playa]

new way because we need speed and content

[BamZow]

who cares about rarity?
we need content and speed.

By looking at your sig, it looks like you do.
You have the same content, but better speeds at other trackers than FTN, but you still want it?

I like those rare ones, mostly because the people in them. Use to be a good friendship in the more rarer sites with not so much new users comming.

[r9batista]

I would like changing it for the new way, but its totally hard.

Nearly all of FST members have a TL account or even two or more, while maybe 1 of every 20 has UK-T. But if it is changed to the new way TL will be rated higher and harder to get, and it is nearly impossible not happen.

So keeping it the old way is maybe better.

But giving a ratio of 5 of the old way and 5 of the new way and adding them would help so much

[Skiz]

new way because we need speed and content

The current system lists speed and content as well.

[KFlint]

we wouldn't even have this discussion if FTN and SCT were still top levels in rarity...

[barral01]

New way. Prefer content and speed than rarity.

[Daniel]

Okay now I've caught up with the old thread and this one with a poll. I've read some interesting points and some things I have to comment on. But first off, I've voted for YES because changing the rating method should help in creating a more balanced and fair trading community. I do believe that it is worth a try to "out" some rare trackers that are in reality just mediocre. What I expect from that? Well, ideally those invites will become gradually less worth because of a lack of interest. In reality it probably won't work this way, because it looks like we have way too many collectors here that only care about being elitist-members on some very rare trackers. While I don't condemn this behavior or mindset, I also don't think that it's helping this forum very much.

My second reason for changing the rating method is to express the true value of the tracker for the first time, compared to all others that are listed. Like I've mentioned earlier somewhere, about 90 trackers in that list have a rating of 6 to 8 with very few above or below that. This doesn't help anyone because how can you compare five trackers that all have a rating of 7 but are in the facts that count very different from each other?

Many of you have mentioned possible new trades like TL for FTN, or something similar, and I'm very sure that this would ultimately be a bad thing. It is within our own power to change it, though. Rarity is without a doubt an important part of this forum and therefore, the level has to reflect that somehow. While other parts of the rating may only get 0-2.5 points, rarity could have a higher ratio of 0-5 or 0-7.5 or even 0-10 at the beginning. I suggest this because it would stop from jumbling all those rare trackers with others that aren't. On the other hand it would be a first step to let the tracker's quality influence its level. ((Personally, I'd use a similar ratings system that lets me recreate a level calculation by using percentages. In any case, the current suggestion would need a bit of fine tuning. ))

Someone in this thread mentioned that with only 2.5 points per criteria we'd all get level 7 to 9 trackers. Well the thing is, we already have this not helping rating if you look at the current list. While the levels are correctly based on rarity, the rating of only a handful of trackers can be taken seriously. Everything else gets lost in the pablum that is rating 6 to 8.

The most important point, whether this new ratio system gets a go or not, is to update the way ratings are built or chosen. If you want to choose a rating for i.e. VIPMusic you should choose values for content, speed and pre-times in direct comparison to other music trackers! To get accurate results, people should only be allowed to suggest ratings by comparing two competing trackers against each other. And ffs, please use the whole width that is offered to you, nobody needs another rating method that ends up putting 80 per cent of the trackers on exactly the same spot again. Start with 0.5 as your lowest point!

[fstrulz]

If you actually read the trackers reviews in the WIAW thread, in the bottom of each review you'll find ratings based on 4 categories: speed, content, pretimes, and rarity. Why not use these ratings altogether to determine the overall rating of a tracker? (using my suggested formula or other proportional formulas)...

I think by implementing this new trackers rating system, all trackers will be rated and treated fairly and equally.

[shosh]

you should take the whole thing down.
i remember this whole fiasco started when a noob asked what invites were worth and syD gave a detailed answer

but i think the reviews of trackers are valuable to those who dont know what a tracker may have and in what language