Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Yourendbsby]

Why 6? Because amazon(imdb) removed all written reviews lower than 6.

Fact.

Episode 2 has only 4 ! Approved written reviews so far

[InfiniteCharger]

a 1/10 review is completely dishonest especially on something like this series, there is nothing to back anyone up giving a 1/10 review on this series let alone most things, if you believe otherwise you are just lying to yourself, many ppl are not honest in thier reviews and reviews dont actually tell anything accurately.

Just because you dont like something doesnt mean it is worth a 1/10, reviews actually mean very little because you cant prove they are actually true or not.

This show is not disrespectful to tolkien in any way, nothing will ever be able to capture the spirit on the origional author to please a hardcore lore fan, companies can spend the money any way they want and employ hundreds or thousands of ppl so the money is not just wasted, things are getting more and more expensive these days.

Again, I am not having this debate with you about your opinion. You can't force people to like something they don't like.
Nobody has to justify themselves to you or anybody else why they rated something the way they did. That is just a waste of time argument.
And I don't see the point.

Also there is no objective way, outside of things like emails, IP addresses or verified accounts to catch "bots".
Otherwise, you have to accept these are the honest reviews of real people and use percentage to filter noise at an aggregate level.

[Lobosan]

Watched the first eps and I have to say that the show is remarkably bland and uninspiring. Not only have they butchered the source material, but the dialogue is among the cringiest I've seen in a long while. And despite all the cash spent, something about the set pieces feels hollow and staged. Though I suppose that's to be expected from the folks who built those laughable villages for The Wheel of Time.

[Shadowferal]

Did I miss a scene? How the hell did this bitch swim back to Middle-Earth?

Something similar to this?

[InfiniteCharger]

a 1/10 review is completely dishonest especially on something like this series, there is nothing to back anyone up giving a 1/10 review on this series let alone most things, if you believe otherwise you are just lying to yourself, many ppl are not honest in thier reviews and reviews dont actually tell anything accurately.

Just because you dont like something doesnt mean it is worth a 1/10, reviews actually mean very little because you cant prove they are actually true or not.

This show is not disrespectful to tolkien in any way, nothing will ever be able to capture the spirit on the origional author to please a hardcore lore fan, companies can spend the money any way they want and employ hundreds or thousands of ppl so the money is not just wasted, things are getting more and more expensive these days.

Look man, if you like it thats all that counts. Why are you worried about anybody else?
Like seriously this is pointless.

[tikcol]

These systems aren't designed to make people justify the reason as to why they gave the review they did.
It is a quick and simple guide to give people feedback that ultimately has value when used in aggregate.
If the system is not worthwhile then they should remove the whole thing all together because all reviews for everything are invalid.
Just focusing on this one show to worry about whether the review system is broken is just ridiculous.
At that point, you may as well say turning off comments is good too because people just don't have the right views on things.
It is the same mentality. Personal opinions aren't quizzes with a right or wrong answer.


If you know what aggregation means then you know why that 1 out 10 rating by itself has no value.
If a lot of people have a 1 out of 10 rating (meaning lowest rating possible) it means they really dislike something.
And because most of this data goes through statistical modeling and analytics, they are going to adjust anyway for internal purposes.
So I don't see your point. People picking the lowest or highest rating whatever it is is going to be one factor out of many.
And this data is collected from across multiple websites and platforms, some with ratings, others with like/dislike and other channels.
This is the day and age of big data and data is the value. Otherwise these web sites wouldn't exist.


As in meaning dislike.

10/10 reviews by his own logic would have no value too and there's about 19k of them and they keep rising every minute. About 4k more 10/10 reviews than 1/10.

Some folks over here are pretending like the show is getting review bombed in a vacuum and conveniently disregarding the 33% of all reviews that give it a perfect score. (those are totally valid, deserved and logical, of course yes)

Literally deleting every written review below 6 overnight? Totally valid. Racist reviews are not allowed. They say.

[Yourendbsby]

10/10 reviews by his own logic would have no value too and there's about 19k of them and they keep rising every minute. About 4k more 10/10 reviews than 1/10.

Some folks over here are pretending like the show is getting review bombed in a vacuum and conveniently disregarding the 33% of all reviews that give it a perfect score. (those are totally valid, deserved and logical, of course yes)

Literally deleting every written review below 6 overnight? Totally valid. Racist reviews are not allowed. They say.

1 is racist

10 is fine

By Woke logic

[InfiniteCharger]

10/10 reviews by his own logic would have no value too and there's about 19k of them and they keep rising every minute. About 4k more 10/10 reviews than 1/10.

Some folks over here are pretending like the show is getting review bombed in a vacuum and conveniently disregarding the 33% of all reviews that give it a perfect score. (those are totally valid, deserved and logical, of course yes)

That is true too. And there is no way to stop that in such review systems....
If it was a simple like/dislike at least all this nonsense about why a 0 out of 10 vs 10/10 would go out the window.
Either you like it or you don't. Period.

Having 1 to 10 or 1 to 5 gives a broader spread that can be more meaningful in aggregate.
But that still means the possibility of the worst or best rating either way.

I also think these social media "storms" go with the system and are an intended part of the analytics.
It means people are "paying attention" to something and making it a popular topic.....
Which means people arguing "for" something and people arguing "against" something.
At the end of the day most people will judge for themselves regardless.


Honestly these people at Amazon knew full well that this was going to be a risky proposition from the door.
They know it and this stuff is just them trying to defend their investment after the fact.
Again, this exercise in 'data and marketing' belies the fact that a good product will generally get good reviews.
And I don't see anything proving otherwise due to this one show.

[Dhrizzle]

So according to you, the amazon policy is not forcing anyone to hire by race quotes or sexual identification?

Do you can read?

Skill based means that those race selected persons or those selected by sexual identity should meet skill requirements.

What the fuck are you talking about?

You try to convince people that amazon studios own race agenda is made up and they only hire by skill.

When it’s only skill based you dont need to mention or draw lines how many % should be black or gay

The % of race/disabilit/sexual identity is clearly stated by them

If any of these aspirational goals are not met, the external partner may be asked to submit a description of the steps that were taken to achieve these goals.

Do you understand? When a external partner as example didn’t fullfill race quotas they have to submit how they will make it happen

No, they have to explain why those goals were not met. Hence the phrase "steps that were taken." Past tense.

[Biomega]

These systems aren't designed to make people justify the reason as to why they gave the review they did.

That doesn't mean 0/10 is justifiable. They're free to give any rating they want, but we're also free to call them out for giving bullshit ratings. That's how it works. That's what I'm doing.

At that point, you may as well say turning off comments is good too because people just don't have the right views on things.

That's you trying again to make this about me not wanting people to not like the show. Which is not what my problem lies with (and besides, if you'd read any of my comments on the show, you'd see *I* don't like it). If comments were used the way ratings were I'd have the same problem; and in fact I have, on many occasions, pointed out to people (including you, I think) why I do not in fact find comments like "I just don't like this" useful. That is NOT the same as saying nobody is allowed to say that, it just means that you liking vanilla ice cream and not chocolate will not result in a constructive debate because those are preferences you can only state, not discuss.

Personal opinions aren't quizzes with a right or wrong answer.

And the only one bringing right or wrong into this is you. Stop doing that. It's not about right or wrong, because these ratings aren't about what one person thinks as much as they are about creating information for other people - and if you misuse the system, you're creating bad information. Your opinion is your opinion, but once you start distorting things for other people, it's no longer just about you.

If you know what aggregation means then you know why that 1 out 10 rating by itself has no value.

Which is partly why I started everything with me saying it's not about value.

If a lot of people have a 1 out of 10 rating (meaning lowest rating possible) it means they really dislike something.

And people using the system like this is why I think it's a shit system. I'm not defending rating systems. I'm showing WHY they're shit - people misuse it.

As in meaning dislike.

But why 6 specifically? Why pick that number and not another?

[Yourendbsby]

No, they have to explain why those goals were not met. Hence the phrase "steps that were taken." Past tense.

Exactly they have to explain why racial quota was not met and what they will do to get the desired racial % .

Simple as that

[InfiniteCharger]

That doesn't mean 0/10 is justifiable. They're free to give any rating they want, but we're also free to call them out for giving bullshit ratings. That's how it works. That's what I'm doing.


That's you trying again to make this about me not wanting people to not like the show. Which is not what my problem lies with (and besides, if you'd read any of my comments on the show, you'd see *I* don't like it). If comments were used the way ratings were I'd have the same problem; and in fact I have, on many occasions, pointed out to people (including you, I think) why I do not in fact find comments like "I just don't like this" useful. That is NOT the same as saying nobody is allowed to say that, it just means that you liking vanilla ice cream and not chocolate will not result in a constructive debate because those are preferences you can only state, not discuss.


And the only one bringing right or wrong into this is you. Stop doing that. It's not about right or wrong, because these ratings aren't about what one person thinks as much as they are about creating information for other people - and if you misuse the system, you're creating bad information. Your opinion is your opinion, but once you start distorting things for other people, it's no longer just about you.


Which is partly why I started everything with me saying it's not about value.


And people using the system like this is why I think it's a shit system. I'm not defending rating systems. I'm showing WHY they're shit - people misuse it.


But why 6 specifically? Why pick that number and not another?

Come on man. Not today.

Nobody has to justify to you or anybody else why they gave a rating of anything. That is the point.

YOU trying to add your magical know it all meaning behind why somebody chose a particular rating is the problem.
I am not going to sit here and debate you are about something so asinine because YOU have no way of proving it one way or another.
So this is pointless. You cannot control other people and or their opinions and what they do in a ratings system.
This is stupid and dumb and this TV show isn't important enough to be venting your spleen about what is and isn't a good review.
A lot of people don't like it. A lot of people apparently do and a lot of people are in the middle.
Nobody can control that, not even Amazon. And ultimately Amazon has the data that matters most: view counts.
And on top of that, how many people watched an episode and for how long which is a much better indication than anything.

[Yourendbsby]

That doesn't mean 0/10 is justifiable. They're free to give any rating they want, but we're also free to call them out for giving bullshit ratings. That's how it works. That's what I'm doing.


That's you trying again to make this about me not wanting people to not like the show. Which is not what my problem lies with (and besides, if you'd read any of my comments on the show, you'd see *I* don't like it). If comments were used the way ratings were I'd have the same problem; and in fact I have, on many occasions, pointed out to people (including you, I think) why I do not in fact find comments like "I just don't like this" useful. That is NOT the same as saying nobody is allowed to say that, it just means that you liking vanilla ice cream and not chocolate will not result in a constructive debate because those are preferences you can only state, not discuss.


And the only one bringing right or wrong into this is you. Stop doing that. It's not about right or wrong, because these ratings aren't about what one person thinks as much as they are about creating information for other people - and if you misuse the system, you're creating bad information. Your opinion is your opinion, but once you start distorting things for other people, it's no longer just about you.


Which is partly why I started everything with me saying it's not about value.


And people using the system like this is why I think it's a shit system. I'm not defending rating systems. I'm showing WHY they're shit - people misuse it.


But why 6 specifically? Why pick that number and not another?

Dude you understand that amazon choose to erase all ratings under 6? All writtwn reviews that where under 6 got erased.

Episode 2 has currently only 4 reviews written according to imdb (imdb=amazon)

[Dhrizzle]

Exactly they have to explain why racial quota was not met and what they will do to get the desired racial % .

Simple as that

No. It is for a situation where the goals were not met. The people are hired, it is done.

[Gumble]

The arguments here are amusing.

Forced diversity is the same thing as discrimination. It is just the people at the top saying that they believe groups of people aren't qualified enough to be hired otherwise. Its -isms from people believing they are "good people".


If you take 2 people, who are closely qualified for a position, and you hire the man over the woman because of his gender, its sexist.

So..... if you take the same 2 people, and hire the woman over the man because of her gender.... what is it?


If you take 2 women, one black and one white, and hire the white woman because of her race, its racist.

If you take the same two women, and hire the black one because of her race..... you guessed it, still racist!



If you take anyone's race, sex, religion, etc into consideration when you are making hiring decisions, it is INHERENTLY WRONG. Every time. Bar none. You don't get exceptions. It is always wrong.


Amazon admitted they hired based on sex and race. Their shows ended up sucking. Maybe don't do that.



At least House of the Dragon seems pretty good so far. First episode is free on youtube!

Infracted.

[Yourendbsby]

No. It is for a situation where the goals were not met. The people are hired, it is done.

Amazon Studios clearly set a racial goal explicitly stated by % number .

When a external Studio didn’t accomplish that they have to justify.

What do you not understand that they set a % of race selected actors?

Why do you pretend it’s not real?

Why they draw likes and say

10% lgbt
10% disabled
And other 30% race quotas and so on

You try to convince people that they have no race selected hires

Are you a troll or just woke as fuck?

Dont bother to try fool people

If any of these aspirational goals are not met, the external partner may be asked to submit a description of the steps that were taken to achieve these goals

A external partner has to justify why they didn’t met racial quota, so how you can sell us a story that there is no racial quota.

By 2024 its up to 50% and it’s gonna be enforced

Its their inclusivity statement

Besides that i am fucking out of this discussion

Woke protector, you are racist by supporting racial based hirings and quotas

Get the fuck out i am done and off

[kenn9530]

Again, I am not having this debate with you about your opinion. You can't force people to like something they don't like.
Nobody has to justify themselves to you or anybody else why they rated something the way they did. That is just a waste of time argument.
And I don't see the point.

Also there is no objective way, outside of things like emails, IP addresses or verified accounts to catch "bots".
Otherwise, you have to accept these are the honest reviews of real people and use percentage to filter noise at an aggregate level.

This is not about an opinion, giving someone a 1/10 review no matter how you feel about it is just completely dishonest, there is not much even the worst produced things dont even deserve a 1/10 rating.

Giving a 1/10 rating proves you are not giving an honest opinion on the matter and have no personal integrity. So most of the reviews are not honest reviews in the slightest and you have been proven wrong on the simple fact that the show is nowhere near a 1/10 rating.

[InfiniteCharger]

This is not about an opinion, giving someone a 1/10 review no matter how you feel about it is just completely dishonest, there is not much even the worst produced things dont even deserve a 1/10 rating.

Giving a 1/10 rating proves you are not giving an honest opinion on the matter and have no personal integrity. So most of the reviews are not honest reviews in the slightest and you have been proven wrong on the simple fact that the show is nowhere near a 1/10 rating.

Again, you have no way to prove this and it is a pointless argument.
In general, a 1 out of 10 means someone dislikes this show and is not going to watch it for the season.
There are many reasons why that is a perfectly valid response, especially as time goes on.
And when combined with the view count data, it will be much more clear how accurate it is.
But outside of Amazon, nobody has that data, so speculating on who is a bot and who is not is pointless.
If the ability exists to give a rating of a certain value, some people will choose it.
Amazon only is concerned about this because of how it may affect viewership.
Outside of that I see no reason to be arguing with you about it.

[Biomega]

Nobody has to justify to you or anybody else why they gave a rating of anything. That is the point.

And my point is that you are absolutely free to give a rating without justification, and I am absolutely free to call that useless and detrimental to the value of the information aggregated from it. I'm not saying people HAVE to justify their ratings, I'm saying that if you misuse the system, you are making things worse for everyone; and giving a rating without (at least implicit) justification is misusing the system.

You seem to think that a binary like/dislike system works the same was a point-based scale. That's not the case. "If I don't like it I'll just give a 0/10" is seriously misunderstanding how such systems are intended to work, and while any one individual won't move the needle, systematic and pervasive misuse DOES sway the average.

You cannot control other people and or their opinions and what they do in a ratings system.

And have I ever suggested as much or said this is what I want? I want ratings systems to go away. I've called them shit multiple times. How you get from me saying don't misuse the system to "I want to control people's opinions" is beyond me.

I want people's input to be useful. "I like this, 10/10" or "I don't like this, 0/10" is not useful. It's the opposite of useful, because it's treating a point-based scale like a binary system, which it isn't.

That's why justification matters to me, too, by the way - because someone simply going "I don't like this" isn't useful, since it's beyond discussion. You don't like it? Cool. So noted. Now we can move on. It doesn't help anyone, and it doesn't create discourse. Justifications do.

[Zodiark]

Again, you have no way to prove this and it is a pointless argument.
If the ability exists to give a rating of a certain value, some people will choose it.

I think your right in your statement. I feel that 1-10 ratings for movies and shows however give too much leeway. Rating from 1-5 I feel is more accurate and all that is needed by most people. 5 stars means it's a damn good, well written, enjoyable program. 1 is Just bad because you didn't like it, it was poorly written and acted, etc. 2 would be like a guilty pleasure, 3-4 are decently good and watchable under most circumstances. But most people aren't going to take the time to weigh the good and bad points much on something they don't like. They will just give whatever the lowest rating is. However today in our age of extremes the top rating will never be good enough and the lowest will never be bad enough to satisfy some. This is why you read reviews of things and see comments like "if I could give 0 stars I would!"