User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Neil Blomkamp Has "Moved On" From Alien 5  (Read 38014 times)

D. Compton Ambrose
Feb 10, 2018, 01:12:08 AM
Reply #195 on: Feb 10, 2018, 01:12:08 AM
Q
The synopsis of that novel sounds even more stale than Blomkamp's pitch for Aliens: Part II.

Except that everyone who has actually read the book seems to think otherwise.
You're talking about The Gone World? Have you read it? What did you think of it?


Beatnation
Feb 10, 2018, 02:29:39 AM
Reply #196 on: Feb 10, 2018, 02:29:39 AM
Q
Is the DC fanboys downvoting this movie EVEN BEFORE THE PREMIERE

Your witch screaming is getting really boring. The film has already had a limited release. Additionally, IMDB has already explained in their Get Satisfaction board, that any private screenings, participates can submit their ratings.

Actually any person with a facebook or imdb account can vote, no just the ones who saw early screenings.


IMDB SYSTEM IS FLAWED.

Then don't go to IMDB.......derp. Perhaps you should stick with rotten tomatoes since it currently has over 80 critics rating it 8.4 rating for BP. That should silence your ranting for awhile.....that is, until a movie comes along you love and RT has given it a lowly rating while IMDB rates it highly. Then you will have to switch back to appease your ranting. Perhaps install a revolving door between the two sites.... ;)

Well the question was how I demostrate IMDb ratings are flawed and I did, I don't care for Rotten Tomatoes User rating neither you should after TLJ debacle.


« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2018, 05:49:32 AM by Beatnation »

SiL
Feb 10, 2018, 03:55:47 AM
Reply #197 on: Feb 10, 2018, 03:55:47 AM
Q
But you didn't demonstrate it. People being allowed to vote on the film doesn't mean it's a flawed system, and imdb weighs scores with an algorithm.



Beatnation
Feb 10, 2018, 05:33:17 AM
Reply #199 on: Feb 10, 2018, 05:33:17 AM
Q
But you didn't demonstrate it. People being allowed to vote on the film doesn't mean it's a flawed system, and imdb weighs scores with an algorithm.

How in the world is not a flawed system when the system let A LOT of haters and fanboys vote a bunch of 10's and 1's even before see the frikkin movie??



"Not Flawed"




« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2018, 05:39:46 AM by Beatnation »

SiL
Feb 10, 2018, 07:00:56 AM
Reply #200 on: Feb 10, 2018, 07:00:56 AM
Q
No online system that allows people to vote or review has a system in place for ensuring someone actually saw the movie before doing so.

And you really, really like ignoring the weighting algorithm, which makes the flood of 1s and 10s effect the rating less - making it a pretty good system.


Biomechanoid
Feb 10, 2018, 07:08:26 AM
Reply #201 on: Feb 10, 2018, 07:08:26 AM
Q
How in the world is not a flawed system when the system let A LOT of haters and fanboys vote a bunch of 10's and 1's even before see the frikkin movie??

You're so eager to scream witch, you're blind to your own evidence you're bringing forward that the IMDB system buffers out ballot stuffers. No system is flawless. Ballot stuffers are a plague internet wide, not just imdb. But IMDB put in a system to block the ballot stuffers.

Now I'm going to take this real slow. You posted earlier the link to the same page, correct? At that time, the 1.0 ratings were just barely over a thousand. You didn't post a screen capture, but you can see my earlier post acknowledging there was only around 1,000 1.0 rating votes. The rating was 6.7 collectively.

Now look at your screen capture, it shows DOUBLE the 1.0 ratings. Now look at the rating, it's STILL 6.7.  How can that be? That increase of 1.0 ratings is over 10% of the total vote count, how could it not affect the collective rating? Is any of this seeping through to you yet?

I'm going to explain this one more time here at AVPG, and then I'm done with it. People want to showcase their ignorance screaming for IMDB blood, have at it.


I've explained here before that you have to earn the right to have your submitted ratings applied to IMDB's weighted average ratings. No, I don't work for IMDB or have no desire to defend IMDB. It's information I researched on a number of ratings/accolade sites for one of my site projects. Here's the criteria I was able to compile on what you must have under your belt before your submitted ratings are actually applied to the weighted average........

1) Age of account - Your account must be an unknown minimum age. If you create a brand new account, rate a movie, it will accept your submission, and it will "tally" your vote in total vote count....but it will not be applied to the weighted average until you reach the minimum age of your account (six months?, one year?, I don't know, they don't make that public). Let's say six months. After six months, your rating is applied to the weighted average. But, if that was the only rating you submitted, it will have a zero "voting value" because of criteria 2....

2) Minimum quantity of ratings - you must have an unknown minimum number of ratings for any of your ratings to be applied. They do not make public what the minimum is. This is to buffer out throw away accounts that are used just to place an extreme rating then forget about it. Some maintain the account so they can use it long term for a whole slew of voting all one's or ten's. This will knock your voting value down to near zero because of criteria 3.......

3) Extreme voting is punished - If you look at any of IMDB's Top 1000 Voters (it's marked on their account page), you will see members whose accounts are a number of years old, they have hundreds if not thousands of ratings, and their voting pattern is in the spirit of why the rating system was created. No given rating dominates their vote pattern. A minimum age account with hundreds of votes dominated with one's and ten's will have a very low or zero "vote value" determined by IMDB's formula, which they do not make public for the obvious reason people would try to circumvent it.


« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2018, 07:54:48 AM by Biomechanoid »

SM
Feb 10, 2018, 08:02:12 AM
Reply #202 on: Feb 10, 2018, 08:02:12 AM
Q
Would've thought the nice friendly blue 'weighted average' that's quite plain the above screencap was a bit of a giveaway...


Beatnation
Feb 10, 2018, 08:45:02 AM
Reply #203 on: Feb 10, 2018, 08:45:02 AM
Q
How in the world is not a flawed system when the system let A LOT of haters and fanboys vote a bunch of 10's and 1's even before see the frikkin movie??

You're so eager to scream witch, you're blind to your own evidence you're bringing forward that the IMDB system buffers out ballot stuffers. No system is flawless. Ballot stuffers are a plague internet wide, not just imdb. But IMDB put in a system to block the ballot stuffers.


Then I rest my case, because I say IMDb User rating system is flawed, which it is because, under your logic, every system is, which was the discussion about this topic in first place.

You can't trust on any User Rating System in internet no IMDb, no Rotten Tomatoes.

« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2018, 08:49:33 AM by Beatnation »

Biomechanoid
Feb 10, 2018, 09:08:33 AM
Reply #204 on: Feb 10, 2018, 09:08:33 AM
Q
LOL! He totally side stepped the evidence IMDB blocks ballot stuffers.

Enjoy your whine fest, Ms. "Flawless".


Beatnation
Feb 10, 2018, 09:25:07 AM
Reply #205 on: Feb 10, 2018, 09:25:07 AM
Q
LOL! He totally side stepped the evidence IMDB blocks ballot stuffers.

Enjoy your whine fest, Ms. "Flawless".

And you totally side stepped that with under your logic, every system is flawed, hence, IMDb User rating system is flawed and that's what the discussion was about.




« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2018, 09:27:31 AM by Beatnation »

Biomechanoid
Feb 10, 2018, 09:33:19 AM
Reply #206 on: Feb 10, 2018, 09:33:19 AM
Q
And you totally side stepped that with under your logic, every system is flawed, hence, IMDb User rating system is flawed and that's what the discussion was about.

Who here said it was flawless? No one here said it was flawless, you're arguing with yourself and you're keying in on an insignificant aspect of what you're being schooled on. Oh wow, Beatnation is the first person ever on the internet to discover people try to circumvent voting systems. Nope, no one but you.... You and only you. You're a genius!  :laugh:


Beatnation
Feb 10, 2018, 09:52:54 AM
Reply #207 on: Feb 10, 2018, 09:52:54 AM
Q
And you totally side stepped that with under your logic, every system is flawed, hence, IMDb User rating system is flawed and that's what the discussion was about.

Who here said it was flawless? No one here said it was flawless, you're arguing with yourself and you're keying in on an insignificant aspect of what you're being schooled on. Oh wow, Beatnation is the first person ever on the internet to discover people try to circumvent voting systems. Nope, no one but you.... You and only you. You're a genius!  :laugh:

You can't trust on a flawed system that's the discussion was about, you can't trust sites as Rotten Tomatos or IMDb when it comes to User Scores, you can when it's Critics Score because that's pretty quantifiable, but no User Scores.

And all this argument starts because The Eight Passenger type this;


Even "Crappie" beat Alien 3 on user reviews at IMDb 6.8/10. Ouch.

Why bother use IMDb User Scores if its a flawed system ?? His choice, for sure, but if you gonna start showing numbers trying to downplay Alien 3 in favor of Crappie gimme something more concrete that "IMDb User Scores", my goodness.

« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2018, 09:58:39 AM by Beatnation »

Biomechanoid
Feb 10, 2018, 10:13:41 AM
Reply #208 on: Feb 10, 2018, 10:13:41 AM
Q
So...you got nothing. Eight Passenger mentioned absolutely nothing about "flawless". All this "flawed, flawless" whining was generated by you. You and only you. You're arguing with yourself.

When there was 1,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating was 6.7.
Now there's 2,000 1.0 ratings for BP,  the collective rating is STILL 6.7.

That increase is OVER 10% of the TOTAL VOTES. Using that genius level aptitude of yours, explain to us how it is mathematically possible for it to remain at 6.7. ..... tick tock. ;)


SM
Feb 10, 2018, 10:14:11 AM
Reply #209 on: Feb 10, 2018, 10:14:11 AM
Q
Quote
Why bother use IMDb User Scores if its a flawed system ?? His choice, for sure, but if you gonna start showing numbers trying to downplay Alien 3 in favor of Crappie gimme something more concrete that "IMDb User Scores", my goodness.

Chappie and Alien 3 are both rated using the same system, and have a similar number of votes.  All it shows is people liked Chappie more.


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed