On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 3:38 PM, S Myers <iamthecheeze@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If, when game submission ends, there are 10 games, we simply say rank
> games fFrom 0 - 9. If there are only 4 games, then rank them 0 - 3.
> if we manage to get 100 games submitted, rank them 0 - 99. This way
> we need not worry about it being either too big or to little of a
> spread.
The point of rating rather than ranking is to let you express your
opinions more precisely. For instance, say you like game A slightly
more than game B, but you like them both a LOT more than game C. If
you just rank them A=3, B=2, C=1, then your opinion isn't fully
represented. But with range voting, you can better express your
opinion by rating A=9, B=8, C=3 (or whatever). You could scale your
votes down to a 1-3 range, and say A=3, B=2.7, C=1; mathematically, it
makes no difference. But I still prefer 1-10 because it's a de facto
standard. (Another scale that many people are familiar with is 1-5
stars, but the BGG scale is a particular precedent for games.)
--dougorleans@xxxxxxxxx