Hopelust: change 2.5 "average" to 2.5 "mediocre?"

Hopelust 05.21.14	all i gotta say is.... who's comin with me?
emester 05.21.14	100% agree with that
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	100% disagree. The "average" label is appropriate. It's a neutral word. Mediocre implies a negative rating.
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	No, list is average.
Sabrutin 05.21.14	Agreed. "Average" to me means that most of bands in the genre could do that, but sometimes albums aren't that good but yet definitely not average.
StallionMang 05.21.14	Well mediocre is a synonym for average so I don't really see the issue
Nikkolae 05.21.14	pree much agree with stallion, there's no reason for a change like that
Hopelust 05.21.14	see above for issue.
Hopelust 05.21.14	List is a combination of mediocre AND average.
unaMUSEd 05.21.14	I go by the numbers and not the words anyway.
Nikkolae 05.21.14	thats why you have the .5 buffer between 2.5 and 3, otherwise we might as well start rating 2.1 2.2 2.3 etc, not all albums are gonna fit perfectly with that description but chaning the name is not gonna change anything.
Joejk3 05.21.14	2.5 being average rustles my autism since you can only give 3 different ratings below average, but you can give 5 different ratings above it. I wish average was 3
unaMUSEd 05.21.14	^this is true
ncguitar 05.21.14	list is 2.5/5
JokineAugustus 05.21.14	Agreed. 3 is a more fair "average" rating imo. Also 3.5 should be "good", not "great". Everything else is fine though.
Hopelust 05.21.14	lol
Hopelust 05.21.14	this is an issue of mathematics here.. because 50% of 5 is 2.5. 3/5 would be 60% and not.. average?
anarchistfish 05.21.14	"Mediocre implies a negative rating." Mediocre Medium ... you're all fucking idiots
Hopelust 05.21.14	agreed. we are. ...well, i am anyway.
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	Joejk3 makes a damn good point. We should be able to rate albums as .5 and 0.
unaMUSEd 05.21.14	Yeah since when does mediocre imply a negative connotation.
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	Fish, pick up a fucking dictionary. (and unamused)
Joejk3 05.21.14	@Hopelust then you should be able to give something a rating of lower than 20% Since the lowest rating you're allowed to give is 20%, I feel it's fair to make 60% average and 100% the maximum.
unaMUSEd 05.21.14	We can rate them as 0.5, I've seen it. I'm not sure how to do it though.
unaMUSEd 05.21.14	mediocre: of only moderate quality.
anarchistfish 05.21.14	"Agreed. 3 is a more fair "average" rating imo. Also 3.5 should be "good", not "great". Everything else is fine though." we don't need more possible negative ratings. there's only so many ways we can say "I don't enjoy this" and I really don't get why this site is obsessed with categorising albums they don't like so finely
anarchistfish 05.21.14	"Fish, pick up a fucking dictionary" ok mediocre ˌmiːdɪˈəʊkə/Submit adjective of only average quality cool
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mediocre http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mediocre http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mediocrity http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/mediocre + every other dictionary in existence. 8=========>
Hopelust 05.21.14	@joejk3 dude, i completely agree with your rustled autism. I'm not sure what the answer is, I just think average isn't a proper descriptor of 2.5. Average and mediocre may be synonyms (I haven't checked yet), but their definitions aren't the same, verbatim.
anarchistfish 05.21.14	if you check most dictionaries one of the possible meanings of average is simply "not good/not bad/meh/inferior" i.e. mediocre
unaMUSEd 05.21.14	"of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad;" exactly...
anarchistfish 05.21.14	Mediocre; not very good: (oxford dictionary def. for average)
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	The words are synonyms, but synonym doesn't always mean they have the exact same meaning. Depending on context, mediocre can have negative connotations.
anarchistfish 05.21.14	so can average
anarchistfish 05.21.14	i'm done here
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	Yes. But it's less common. That's the whole point I'm trying to make.
MO 05.21.14	no this is dum
Joejk3 05.21.14	Even though most definitions don't take note of this, mediocre is becoming increasingly negative over time. For example, if you asked somebody how their day was and they said 'mediocre' you would think something had upset them in some way. If they just said 'average' you wouldn't think twice about it.
KriegdemKriege 05.21.14	^ Joe gets it.
Hopelust 05.21.14	Yeah, so what I'm trying to say is Average doesn't fully do a 2.5 rating justice. Because I might say that an album is 2.5 but that doesn't mean you shouldn't think twice about it. It may sound original in its delivery, however, it just isn't really all that good. It's mediocre. Average just makes it sound run-of-the-mill, nothing new, when mediocre doesn't imply that.
pedro70512 05.21.14	How about 5: FUCKING AWESOME 4.5: Really great 4: Pretty sweet 3.5: Solid stuff 3: Alright 2.5: Meh 2: Bleh 1.5: Yuck 1: Ugh
Mort. 05.21.14	i dont pay attention to the words next to the rating system so i dont care it doesnt change what you think of the album, i dont think the albums i give below 5s arent classics. i dunno man i dont get what the issue is
Lambda 05.21.14	Can we just get rid of what the rating "means" and have ratings in .1 increments.
anarchistfish 05.21.14	let's face it most sputnik user's ratings go like this 5: some gay 2004 album 4.5: aoty 4: good 3.5: ok 3: poor 2.5: poor 2: filling up the space 1.5: filling up the space 1: didn't listen
anarchistfish 05.21.14	so really who cares
Hopelust 05.21.14	lol
PunchforPunch 05.21.14	fish hit the nail on the head
Funeralopolis 05.21.14	fish is correct
Joejk3 05.21.14	5: some gay 2004 album lold
Funeralopolis 05.21.14	5: where the latest trending albums are kept for a week
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	Very interesting thread tbh
titanslayer 05.21.14	average=mediocre....
jtswope 05.21.14	hahaha fish
MuhNamesTyler 05.21.14	It was IMO tbf
Slut 05.21.14	You know what let's just make my 2.5 -classic I think that makes sense yup
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	5: Masterful 4.5: Superb 4: Excellent 3.5: Very Good 3: Good 2.5: Passable 2: Bad 1.5: Awful 1: Disgraceful I mean, 5 positive levels is good, 4 negative levels should be enough as well i mean i speak for myself when i say i'm usually not that specific about how much i dislike something so i think it's just right As it is though, i think it's good. Just a matter of wording i guess
pedro70512 05.21.14	"5: some gay 2004 album" Leviathan...Panopticon...ouch.
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	"5: Jane Doe or anything by Opeth"
MuhNamesTyler 05.21.14	Haha I only have 2 5s and 1 of them is from 2004 LOLOMG
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	LOLOMG XDDD
MuhNamesTyler 05.21.14	OmgOmg such coincidence It's like he was talking about me !!
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	"this is an issue of mathematics here.. because 50% of 5 is 2.5. 3/5 would be 60% and not.. average?" doesnt work like that buddy, you dont start at 0 for ratings so you cant just divide 5 by 2. just like how the average between 2 and 4 = 3, which is not half of 4: 1 is to 5 1.5 is to 4.5 2 is to 4 2.5 is to 3.5 3 is in the middle
Hopelust 05.21.14	you got me.
MuhNamesTyler 05.21.14	"List is mediocre and/or average." Get Icarus the Owl off here you friggin dickhead
Hopelust 05.21.14	ehhh no. That shit's mediocre. definitely NOT average. Mediocre. I respect they're doing something fairly original, im just not buyin it.
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	its all good, just my math minor coming out dx
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	Well put SpaceMan, but i still feel like 5 positive levels and 4 negative levels are just fine. I mean average/passable/mediocre or wtv being a 3 would mean it would represent a 5/10, or 50% percentage. I like to think of "average" as a 40%-55%, and the "good" level as like 55%-65% or smth like that. So a 3 still feels a little too much to call "average" as it is actually not a positive connotation imo, but one on the negative side for the most part
witchxrapist 05.21.14	orrrr you could start rating things based on the descriptors rather than arbitrarily deciding on what the numbers mean yourself
Wafflez 05.21.14	The way it works 1-3 = Shit, not worth listening 3-4 = Worth listening 4+ = Listen right now
Pennywise_M 05.21.14	"orrrr you could start rating things based on the descriptors rather than arbitrarily deciding on what the numbers mean yourself" needs moar autism
witchxrapist 05.21.14	idk i think spergies would at least get that concept if little else u no? numbers omg
MuhNamesTyler 05.21.14	"ehhh no. That shit's mediocre. definitely NOT average. Mediocre. I respect they're doing something fairly original, im just not buyin it." You are forgiven for this statement cause you opened the thread with a Half Baked reference
Cygnatti 05.21.14	The only change to the rating system on Sputnik that's needed is re-adding 0.5/5 so I can lower all my ratings by .5. :]
treeqt. 05.21.14	don't you think you wouldn't have that problem if you decided to uniformly rate based on EITHER quality or originality
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	I can agree with that, .5 would keep things at even increments but a .5 seems like a low blow to the artist and would probably be abused too much
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	you cant trust the ignorant masses lol
treeqt. 05.21.14	there is literally no difference between a 0.5 if added and a 1 right now L I T E R A L L Y N O N E
Cygnatti 05.21.14	Originality and quality are overrated. :]
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	it is if you look at it as the quantity of the number, which apparently you don't
witchxrapist 05.21.14	there would be a .5 difference treeqt lmao dummy
Cygnatti 05.21.14	The two would "qualitatively" accomplish the exact same thing.
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	agreed it just depends on how you look at it
treeqt. 05.21.14	except it does not
TheSpaceMan 05.21.14	true, depends on how you look at it
SaneTBP 05.21.14	I dunno why people want to have more diff ratings for bad albums. Why does it matter if it's a 1.5 or 1? It sucks anyway and the rating says what it has to :] Just my thoughts, I much prefer to seperate my liked albums so I can see what albums to relisten and stuff
Hopelust 05.21.14	"You are forgiven for this statement cause you opened the thread with a Half Baked reference" aaaaaathankya. Glad you caught on!
witchxrapist 05.21.14	grow up baking is no joke u toker
NordicMindset 05.21.14	2.5 is average
pedro70512 05.21.14	Well shit, nobody in this thread is very impressive then if it tops out at 5.
MuhNamesTyler 05.21.14	We are all white sorry
pedro70512 05.21.14	"70512(actual size)" That's what you get when you've been on Sputnik since 1969.
Pennywise_M 05.22.14	"I dunno why people want to have more diff ratings for bad albums. Why does it matter if it's a 1.5 or 1? It sucks anyway and the rating says what it has to :]" Agreed. I only use 1.5 because 1 seems too bad, but 1.5 shouldn't even exist. it should be taken as 2 is bad, 1 is just on the lowest tier of bad. I can't even tell the difference between 1.5 and 1 tbh, it's just a matter of conscience lel
NordicMindset 05.22.14	1 is like ultra shitty shit
pedro70512 05.22.14	To me, 1 means they not only contributed nothing, but made the world worse by making that album. T-Pain gets a 1.5 because it's stupid but doesn't really hurt anyone; Nickelback gets a 1 because it encourages people to think like Chaddy Kreuger and treat women as objects and throw their lives away.
dante1991 06.09.14	I generally consider a 3.0 to be "average" or "mediocre" to me. For me, anything under that implies a negative rating, but it takes a monumental failure for me to rate an album below a 2.0 anyway...
bach 06.09.14	remember that someone in the universe was literally concerned enough about this problem to spend time making a list with a paragraph included and that equally concerned people responded with paragraphs
Phlegm 06.09.14	omg how did i miss this❣❣❣❣❣
osmark86 06.09.14	1 is to 5 1.5 is to 4.5 2 is to 4 2.5 is to 3.5 3 is in the middle aye
Keyblade 06.09.14	rating is srs bi'ness
osmark86 06.09.14	life defining even
KriegdemKriege 06.09.14	"remember that someone in the universe was literally concerned enough about this problem to spend time making a list with a paragraph included and that equally concerned people responded with paragraphs" I loled
Feather 06.13.14	3,7,9,10 are all way better than a 2.5...
Chortles 06.13.14	itt: greasefarms who think way too much about ratings
Lord(e)Po)))ts 06.13.14	WHO FUCKING CARRRESS
Cygnatti 06.13.14	ratings are important but no :]
Calc 06.13.14	^^^^^^
demigod! 06.13.14	i mean it makes sense but yea who gives a shit
DikkoZinner 06.13.14	Not opposed to it
MuhNamesTyler 06.13.14	Yeah instead of 2.5 meaning a 2.5 can we make 2.5 actually mean 3
DikkoZinner 06.13.14	or 2.75
MuhNamesTyler 06.13.14	And 4 could actually mean 6
DikkoZinner 06.13.14	lol
MuhNamesTyler 06.13.14	Lol yeah you dork
Necrotica 06.13.14	I'd rather switch the staff "1" rating from "afwul" to "awful"
facupm 06.13.14	let's face it most sputnik user's ratings go like this 5: some gay 2004 album 4.5: aoty 4: good 3.5: ok 3: poor 2.5: poor 2: filling up the space 1.5: filling up the space 1: didn't listen [2]
Pennywise_M 06.14.14	lol yeah, i speak for myself at least when i say i'm a huge music nerd tbh.
Aftertheascension 07.03.14	Collide with the Sky is tops rest of the list is pretty average
Deviant. 07.03.14	I say "average" in everyday conversation far more than I would "mediocre". Like, "man that movie was pretty average". Who would say "well that movie was quite mediocre"? What am I, an accountant?
someguest 07.03.14	maybe you just overrate everything like every other dumbass on this web site
toomanyxsinmyname 09.24.14	This list is bad. 1st off, Pierce the Veil and Comeback kid are NOT mediocre. Popular =/= bad. OP is a dumbass. Average is more common, we're not talking in Colonial America vernacular.
Feather 09.24.14	3,7,9,10 are far from average or mediocre.