• Yaky@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    5 days ago

    Recently, saw some survey that explicitly said 1-7 is “poor”, 7-8 is “OK”, and 9-10 is “great”. Wild, not sure what the point of the scale is then.

    Same with book ratings. Looking at StoryGraph, the average ratings I see is somewhere between 3.5 and 4.5. While I would rate a decent book a 3.

    Born in Eastern Europe, live in the US, maybe that’s why.

    • 0ops@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 days ago

      I wonder if it’s like the grading system we use in school? <60% is F for fail, 60% to <70% is D which depending on the class can be barely passing or barely failing. >=70% would be A, B, and C grades which are all usually passing, and A in particular means doing extremely well or perfect (>=90%). I just noticed that that rating scale kind of lines up with the typical American grading scale, maybe that’s just a coincidence

        • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Apples and watermelons. The all-time highest major league batting average is only .371, nowhere near .500 which would correspond to 50% of the max possible.

            • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              I believe you. On a rating scale of 0-10 a value of 5 doesn’t usually represent a failure or anything negative, it’s usually a middle concept such as “neither like nor dislike”. Batting average is another example where 50% isn’t a “failing grade”. Hope that helps clear it up for you.

              • lime!@feddit.nu
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                5 days ago

                no i mean i don’t know what a “batting average” is or why it’s apples to oranges to compare it to test scores.

                i’m assuming you mean that comparing a pure gaussian distribution to a weighted system is unproductive?