That’s cool, but can I make another suggestion?
Star rating averages can be rather ‘unfriendly’ when you have a popluar item that gets low-balled by a low rating. Can the stars system be revised to be similar to that of eBay’s — where a % of the star is highlighted instead of it being either ON or OFF ?
The top two are GRs, the bottom one is a properly ‘averaged’ system from eBay.Not that I overly care about rating systems (they can be easily abused), I just thought it would better reflect the quality of items. 4 out of 5 stars is like 80%, when really it could more like 98% (just had one or two low ratings out of 20 or 30 ratings). Know what I mean?
Majority of rating variations falls between 4 star to 5 star (80 to 100%). The 5th star can be more detailed and safer if divided 4 parts to show 80 (full gray), 85, 90, 95 and 100%
Regarding the new system, I don’t think the ability to edit rating is a positive change for authors. It helps just to solve mistaken ratings but what about if a buyer with wrong mood modifies a 5 star into 1 star after 5 years. There should be a time limit like 2 months etc to be able to modify rating.
Great news, Mark! Thanks a lot !
Another tool to blackmail authors. Thanks envato.
^ Whoa Damojo you went green! Awesome achievement dude
wow, unlimited ? that’s very good …. for buyers
rolling out this without any change to deal with bad ratings makes me so happy about it.
I’d say this is a bad move and has not been thought through by Enavto.
So in an attempt to fix the rare situation where a buyer mistakingly gives a rating of 1 star, the system has been completely opened, creating a situation where a buyer, who is angry that you won’t bend over backwards (again) and help make the latest change requested by their client, can use the ratings as a device to get revenge on authors (who are not required to give support in the first place)!
IMO it would make more sense to allow 1 single change only of the rating system, to allow for the correction of a mistake rating, and that this rating, if lower then the first one, is required to be accompanied by an explanation / feedback / reason for change – which is sent anonymously to the author.
This would obviously still be open to abuse, but in a limited way compared to this new system.