Has there been any more thought to adding four ratings instead of three to the new question game as discussed earlier in the thread?

I play this game every day and rate the questions (and have done since it began) but to be honest I'm getting bored of doing it because as it stands now it's pretty meaningless so whats the point?

I think that Wesley said it would be better to have five ratings (like we have with normal quizzes). Either way, I doubt there has been any more thought or there would have been more discussion.

I don't understand why it is meaningless. You rate questions. If they are rated badly they are binned. If they are rated high (and have a good %age correct) then they get the author one step closer to a badge. If you score well they go through to Piece of Cake (or something like that). If you score badly they go through to Obscurity (or something like that). Why is it meaningless?

You earn points. You can earn team points. You can even earn a couple of badges. If you don't care about questions being rated or authors seeing the fruits or their labours then that's fine (well actually it isn't - it's a bit selfish), but I would think you certainly care about points, team points and badges.

I think Midget40's point in saying it's meaningless is that almost every question ends up being average, if you reserve the other two ratings for questions that really stand out. I know that almost all my ratings are average. But that's all right - I'm saying that the question is OK, and that's the essential point of judgement.

Oh, okay. But if you are rating the poor questions poor and just answering the questions (the right/wrong determines which game it is put in), then you are at least helping a bit.

Thankyou Looney tunes that is what I was trying to say - sorry I didn't phrase it better.

I actualy care very much about the authors hard work which is why I keep pushing for more catagories. I want to be able to score half of my 'averages' higher than the other half so that those authors get more recognition and higher ratings (and a chance towards a badge if they're working towards one).

To me its meaningless because they are nearly all ending up in the average catagory and there is a HUGE difference between the quality of some of them.

Midget, I had the same problem, but by now I have simply adapted my standards and become more flexible in setting the levels. I have definitely picked up the habit to rate at least the best question "good" and the least good one "poor" in a set of ten (except in the rare cases that a set really has nothing to praise or criticize).

I usually go by the "was this an experience" criterion. A good question teaches me something, helps me into a solution on an otherwise obscure item or simply has entertaining info. On the other hand, a question linking two random items and not providing the slightest interesting fact about in either of them will be scored as poor.