OK, time for some stats crunch. I’ll write in English since some other users may be interested in this.
For some time now I’ve had an ongoing discussion with Marko about rating criteria he is using. There was a thread about it here, someone created MRI (Miserable raters index) which puts in perspective number of 3.8/4+ rates and total number of rates. However Marko made a valid point that MRI doesn’t take in account avg rate of beers you’ve tried. So I’ve decided to put that into perspective. I chose top exyu raters and some foreign Ratebeerians so the thing goes beyond Marko. Ideally it would be nice to see data for more users, but since that requires significant amount of time which I don’t have.
Basically each range of scores is compared to total beers and to the number of avg 3.8+ or 4+ beers tried. Color scales are horizontal, comparing the scores with other users. I wanted to see if ogivlado and Marko adjusted over the years so made a special columns for their rates in last three years.
So my premises are:
- most raters have a certain upper limit score after which they are reluctant to give ratings, as a result some users are not using good portion of the scoring scale
- I tend to give really bad rates to bad beers and really good to good ones
- Marko does just the opposite - good beers and bad beers are scored closer to the average which results in his avg beer rated and avg score given to be almost the same although he underscores good beers
Comments are welcome.
Disclamer: data was extracted manually and errors are possible. If you see one let me know.
