[FEAT]Scan quality of excellent scores is only 1

[coulonnus]

Sometimes I notice an excellent scan with "scan quality" = 1 only. Could it be that this rating was put by Google or another robot when it visits imslp? Putting a rating requires only two mouse clicks.

[Eric]

There seems to be a bug with the rating system. I think any rating one attempts registers only as a 1. That's part of the bug.

[coulonnus]

I just discovered that once you've said OK to the warning message this message no longer shows up when you click the stars of other pieces. Then I imagine Google can put many, many 1-star ratings. One mouse click is enough then.

Additionnaly I think there should be a warning like "don't rate the engraving nor the print quality of the score scanned".

[cypressdome]

I just left five star ratings for two files (and they did deserve them). Both accepted the five star rating and I did receive the warning message only for the first file. Now I know in the past I've received the warning message so I wonder if the system remembers you for so much time (hours?, days?) after you leave the first rating and so suppresses the warning message until the expiration of that time period.

As for why users give low ratings to obviously high-quality scanned images well you can tell people until you are blue in the face to only rate an item based upon scan quality, or typeset quality, or performance quality and you will be right back to where you started: low ratings will given to high-quality scanned images/typesets/performances. And the reverse is true as well: high ratings for obviously low-quality images/typesets/performances. People will rate them based upon their like/dislike of the composer, the work in question, the edition, the scanner, the typesetter, the submitter, and on and on. Users and their friends will inflate the ratings of performances and new compositions. I wish I could remember the one work I saw that had been downloaded about 40 times and yet had about 20 five star ratings. Furthermore, it is a subjective rating system and what is five stars to one user may only be three stars to another. One can only hope that given enough time and enough ratings the resulting rating for a file will better reflect the general consensus of that file's quality.

Cypressdome

edit
Ok, now this is somewhat weird. I left five star ratings for the piano score and the violin part for Hans Sitt's Violin Concerto No.1. I've now gone back to the page and it shows no ratings at all for the violin part (the first file I rated) and two five star ratings for the piano score. I'm running Firefox 21 under Windows 7.

[Rabenhorst]

Just a few minutes ago I uploaded this:
http://imslp.org/wiki/%C3%80_la_m%C3%A9 ... gismund%29

The files have not even passed the copyright review - and there already emblazoned an (albeit lonely) star. A robot? Or someone wants us to fool.
Well - we take it with humor (seldom laughed as much).
Ralph Theo Misch

[cypressdome]

Ralph,

I just gave your file a rating of five stars just to see what it would do and the behavior seems to be working correctly--two ratings showing up averaging to 3 stars. I closed out of Firefox and opened the page again and have even purged the pages history and I'm still seeing the two ratings.

Here's the weird part again. I then rated the color cover five stars and it then correctly displayed five stars. I then refreshed the page and now the complete score shows 3 ratings averaging out to just over four stars and the color cover now has no ratings. That's got to be a bug.

On the positive side your submitted score now has a very nice rating!

Cypressdome

[imslp]

Just saw the update to this thread - that's a bug if I ever saw one. It'll be fixed soon.

[Notenschreiber]

My observation with own contributions is: from one star to five, completely arbitrary. The reason may be bugs or vandalism or something else.
And i´m really not alone with this impression. It must be allowed to ask: for whom is there any profit of this ratings? I would propose to cancel
this feature!

[cypressdome]

The latest abuse:
8 Primeras piezas criollas by Cluzeau Mortet: faint scans of photocopies garnering seven and five 5-star ratings.
Primera suite de valses by Cluzeau Mortet: scan of a thirty-year old photocopy (which looks to have been a photocopy of a photocopy, etc.) garnering two 5-star ratings.

At least three other scores of this composer haven't even passed copyright review yet and already have 5-star ratings. Obviously, someone simply wants to promote this composer's work and in so doing has rendered the whole point of scan quality ratings meaningless.

[Hobbypianist]

...well, I would suggest to disable the scan rating function
- if a file has or [TB]
- for own uploaded scores to prevent users from promoting their own compositions /scans, etc.

Is this technically possible?

Regards,
HP