> I just give you two books that you've read and you tell me which is better.
I've always been so for this in situations where the users also have a database of their own history on the site, like Goodreads or Boardgamegeek.com, for example. Just throw up modals every once and a while comparing two books that you know the user knows, and make it easy to opt out of. I probably wouldn't opt out, because it would appeal to my ego and feel like a game.
> Humans just aren't very good at ranking things on a normal distribution, so you invariably end up with every item (books in this case) being ranked somewhere in the 3.5-4.5 range (since Goodreads is out of 5). For IMDB the rankings all hover around 8ish. When in reality the average book should have a 2.5. If you don't rate like this then you just end up with garbage.
Just normalize the users against themselves. I wouldn't be giving a 4-star review, I'd be giving a pessimizer(4-star review).
I've always been so for this in situations where the users also have a database of their own history on the site, like Goodreads or Boardgamegeek.com, for example. Just throw up modals every once and a while comparing two books that you know the user knows, and make it easy to opt out of. I probably wouldn't opt out, because it would appeal to my ego and feel like a game.
> Humans just aren't very good at ranking things on a normal distribution, so you invariably end up with every item (books in this case) being ranked somewhere in the 3.5-4.5 range (since Goodreads is out of 5). For IMDB the rankings all hover around 8ish. When in reality the average book should have a 2.5. If you don't rate like this then you just end up with garbage.
Just normalize the users against themselves. I wouldn't be giving a 4-star review, I'd be giving a pessimizer(4-star review).