In the OWC thread there is a way of voting on each entry so that a aggregate rating is shown alongside the script title in the thread's home page.

I thought this was quite a nice idea, and while I realise it was because the OWC is a competition of sorts, I was wondeirng whether the idea might work with the normal script threads?

Has it ever been considered?

I suppose that it might be thought as introducing an unfair element into the board, but as we read and review the scripts, and say whether we like them or not anyway, this would be a very clear way to see which scripts are getting the most positive feedback. I should say that the previous writing site had this feature, and it was one of the few things I thought worked there.

I believe it has already been tried with disastrous results.  People rarely agree with their rating unless all the stars are filled.   But someone who was around when it was tried can probably tell you more about the "experiment".

Quoted from mcornetto I believe it has already been tried with disastrous results.  People rarely agree with their rating unless all the stars are filled.   But someone who was around when it was tried can probably tell you more about the "experiment".

I didn't rate the scripts in the last challenge because I was hopeless to choose any kind of winner of sorts.

As stated in the threads, two of my favorites were Autumn Song and Broadway Betty, but only because they just hooked me in a particular way that I couldn't resist.

There were other scripts that really met the challenge strongly with the comedy element, and I had a hard time choosing, but I, in my weakness, couldn't stop with my penchant for these ones in particular, but that's just me.

In the end, I feel that "the rating system" is overrated. Like, what are you looking for? A handshake? A purple crown? If that's what you want then maybe you outta go to Hollywood and be an actor. They at least get to wear it. What the hell do we do anyways?

So don't get hung up on ratings and bullshit. Do what matters to you the most. That's the shit-- straight up, Love.

Sandra

Quoted from mcornetto I believe it has already been tried with disastrous results.  People rarely agree with their rating unless all the stars are filled.   But someone who was around when it was tried can probably tell you more about the "experiment".

Everything like that ends bad around here.

You think everyone is pals until you give them power (Like karma for individuals) but somehow people find ways to abuse it for no reason at all.

It shows how two faced people are and would be nice if you could see the ones who rated so people would seriously think before acting.

Another site I was on had karma for individuals and after one post this guy shot to a -15 and forced the admin/moderator to continually zero out his rating.

With the ratings, what tended to continually happen is that scripts would get hit with one star ratings and yet, the threads didn't reflect any reviews that would indicate why. The only thing we could figure was that someone trolled through the scripts that were doing well and hit them with one star...just because. Complaints erupted. Accusations flew. It just got ugly very quickly.

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

Quoted from George Willson ...what tended to continually happen is that scripts would get hit with one star ratings...

Particularly scripts with favorable ratings.

Any script that "dared" to have a 5-star rating -- often with a review to back it up -- would invariably get hit with anonymous 1-star ratings -- no reviews, of course -- simply to tear it back down.

Stupid and petty -- but you can't fight human nature -- and the rating system was trash-canned because it essentially became meaningless.

Of course, that was a few years ago -- but there is no reason to believe it would not be much the same today.

That is part of the reason we started the "Simply Recommended Scripts" thread -- it is not anonymous -- and is the most fair way we have thought of (so far) to recognize works that a reader might feel are ahead of the curve:

http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-knowyou/m-1141227828

There's some things that could be done to prevent people trolling around. Three things, actually.

First. Make who rated what visible to everyone else. People do things when they're anonymous that they wouldn't do when they're not.

Second. To be able to vote on a script, you have to register to the site. Why not?

Third. Let it be visible on a person's page how they've rated. Obviously, if a person has 20 consecutive 1-star ratings, something is definitely wrong.

This makes 4, but it's not about why ratings could end up working.

If you were to do ratings, don't make it a simple 1-10. That way, people who are new, might not know the format or the script is in its first draft, people can judge that poorly, but if the script is good, they can judge that well.

Like this:

Story: 1-10.
Execution: 1-10.
Grammar/Spelling: 1-10.
Structure: 1-10.
Entertainment Value: 1-10.

Then, it justs calculates the average.

Just a thought, though.

Absolutely against this.

What would rating scripts achieve? Nothing posted on here is 'finished', in my eyes. Everything, even scripts on their third or fourth draft, are works in progress. My comments are usually intended to flag up issues and help the writer improve their script - so what's the point of rating them?

OWCs are different, since there are set parameters and, to an extent, it is possible to judge how well a writer has met the challenge. But with all the other scripts? Bad ratings will just demoralise writers and cause people to avoid the scripts most in need of help. Good ratings...well, what will they really achieve? An ego boost, perhaps. What good is that, in the long run? Isn't actual, qualified praise better than the bluntness of a rating? I'm guessing most people would rather know what could be improved in their work than be handed an arbitrary score that doesn't actually MEAN anything.

Just my opinion, of course. But I really hope this isn't introduced.

I got to say I'm against the ratings too.  Some people might love a script and others hate it so all you get are average scores.  That's just how it goes, what one person gold is anothers turd.  A new film is reviewd by a single review and they give their impartial and honest opinion.  More reviews simply contradict views so the only fair system is if ONE PERSON reviews every script posted....any volunteers?

Quoted from JonnyBoy Absolutely against this. What would rating scripts achieve? Nothing posted on here is 'finished', in my eyes. Everything, even scripts on their third or fourth draft, are works in progress. My comments are usually intended to flag up issues and help the writer improve their script - so what's the point of rating them? But I really hope this isn't introduced.

I agree wholeheartedly with JB here - can't see anything positive coming out of it except to create unfair bias and foster in some circumstances ill-will towards others. .

Disagreements can occur under normal circumstances, I feel this would just create opportunities for more disagreement and defeat the great community-feel that is SS. Just adding mo.

Also, as Bert has mentioned script recommendations can be posted in the appropriate thread.

A script rating system is useless. I am here to learn not be rated. I need words of advice not numbers of negativity.

Well, that pretty well answers that! Thanks everyone for the comments.

To tell you the absolute truth, I had forgotten all about the Recommended Scripts Thread - maybe it needs to be promoted more? I think I shall pop over there at some time to add a couple of scripts I have been impressed with recently, and stick to that avenue in future.

Thanks again for the feedback.

This is very strange, I had this thought yesterday of rating scripts on here. But yes the Recommend thread is pretty much for that. Good idea though. I could see how it'd go either way on the boards.

Quoted from grademan A script rating system is useless. I am here to learn not be rated. I need words of advice not numbers of negativity.

Strange. I agree, but in a different line. I am here to learn to rate myself against myself and for that I think I need negativity and I also need numbers, but not from some elusive "ideal" or "perceived ideal" because that's just useless.

I can't feel anything tangible in five stars or purple crowns. I only feel it inside of the action towards something uncertain. A desire that compels me to work for this mysterious uncertainty.

A script that I would rate as 5 stars would be Killing on Carnival Row because I get it and it's like when you hear a song and you get it. But I'm not even sure where the script came from.

Sandra

Not a bad suggestion. Mr. Blond's pro arguements had me halfway towards entertaining the notion but Johnnyboy has put me firmly in the "nay" corner again. And the fact that it was tried before with disasterous results ahould be enough to leave things be. Would things be any different now if reintroduced? I can't say for sure but I seriously doubt it.

I had no idea about the recommended thread either, a fantastic idea but yeah, maybe it could do with being advertised/promoted more. Even have it as one of the main threads on the discussion board page itself or provide links to it from other areas on he site.

I realise you have to be careful not over sell or make it too convenient to  namedrop stuff there as everyone will start using it if its only one click away which would cheapen the whole idea of it but as its stands it might not be a bad thing to give it some more exposure.