Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

kaguya.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 214 posts

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#171

Post by gamblor956 »

7bit wrote: post #102
magicalhippo wrote: post #12

> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.

Black Panther has a rating of 96% at Rotten Tomatoes. So whatever the scale is, nothing is really meaningful. I've been in the cinema with about 60 other people and a friend. statistically one of us should have enjoyed it but we both found the movie shit. So no, 10 stars is not more meaningful as 5 stars. 2-4 should be enough to still be wrong about taste once in a while.

96% means that 96% of critics liked the movie enough to recommend it.

It also means that 4% of critics did not recommend the movie. In a theater of 60 people, you and your friend would fit into that 4%. So there's nothing wrong with RottenTomatoes.

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#172

Post by stevage »

latexr wrote: post #76
magicalhippo wrote: post #12

> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.

Agreed in general that 10 and even 5 is too much, and that 4 is a good compromise. Though personally I prefer thumbs up and thumbs down, plus a separate starring option. The first two signify “would I recommend this to anyone else” while the latter means “this has something interesting I’d like to revisit at a later date”. Something losing its star rating is par for the course, but the recommendation status is less l…

I informally often use a -1 to 2 scale. Bad, fine, good, great.

The difference between 1 and 2 on a 5 point scale is not useful.

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#173

Post by stevage »

jfengel wrote: post #48
nerdponx wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and that's why Netflix switched to thumbs up/down instead of 5 stars.

And they mostly ignore that. They have access to what you actually watch, rather than what you say you like. They know what you start, what you finish, and how quickly you jump on a new one. It doesn't matter how many times you down vote Mexican soap operas or singing talent shows. If you keep watching they're gonna keep suggesting them.

Yeah and I hate this scheme. Facebook keeps showing me clips that I do not want to watch and yet fined myself drawn to watching like some compulsive behaviour. Urgh.

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#174

Post by hiAndrewQuinn »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #166
hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To present an opposite viewpoint, I try to only engage with media I suspect future me will be able to revisit and pull enjoyment out of at least once. I rarely actually do so, but I've found it to be a remarkably effective quality filter. It's also a genre independent quality metric. That's not to be underplayed. Some examples of films that successfully passed it for me: Casablanca ; Portrait of a Lady on Fire ; Here…

Have you ever watched a film like Come and See, Schindlers list, Grave of the fireflies, etc…? These movies are some of the most impactful that I have ever seen, but by no means would I rate them highly rewatchable. They are gut wrenching, and some people can only stand to watch them once, few want to rewatch them, but they are also incredible. I also gain a lot from a rewatchable piece of content, but you might be s…

I've seen the latter two, but they are most certainly very rewatchable. I saw Schindler's List again with my wife about a year ago and enjoyed it just as thoroughly as the first time.

>I also gain a lot from a rewatchable piece of content, but you might be shorting yourself by always watching things designed to tickle the dopamine receptors.

Now this I just do not understand. Things designed to be good on primarily the first watch, and allowed to degrade on future experiences, seem much worse for this.

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#176

Post by magicalhippo »

lgl wrote: post #96
magicalhippo wrote: post #12

> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.

Sure, but can we really deny that the 5 star rating is pretty decent and simple, having an exact middle point and then two levels for each side.

Well yeah, but I feel the neutral midpoint is problematic because I feel it's too easy to pick it. Removing the midpoint forces one to decide which side it leans towards.

If one really feels the need for the "meh" category, I'd say go for a 3-level system: bad, meh, great.

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#177

Post by magicalhippo »

magicalhippo wrote: post #117
gniv wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having worked on a rating system, I think 10 levels are useful (or 5 levels with half-stars). You can create better averages/recs using 10 levels, since ratings of 0 or 10, which are often spammy, can be down-weighed.

I can absolutely understand that it makes sense to have a much more fine-grained average, but personally I struggle to give meaningful ratings beyond the four I mentioned. That said perhaps multiple binary dimensions would be better. Good story yes/no, interesting/unique premise yes/no, overall good acting yes/no, good cinematography yes/no etc etc.

I was interrupted, so when I picked up my brain continued with movie recommendation mode, I watch more movies than read books, but the binary multi-dimensional rating could of course be applied to books as well.

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#178

Post by stock_toaster »

magicalhippo wrote: post #12

> 10-star rating system (More nuance than 5 stars) Does one really get anything meaningful out of saying this was a 6-star book vs a 7-star book? Personally I think 4 levels is sufficient. Either it's rather bad, not bad but not good, good but not great or it's great. Anything beyond that will have to be written in words.

I typically like 7 point scales (like this[1] post from jgc outlines), but your classification also seems pretty good.

[1]: https://blog.jgc.org/2007/12/seven-point-scale.html

Re: Show HN: I built a modern Goodreads alternative

#180

Post by jwe »

AnonC wrote: post #142

I’m certainly not the target for this. The following is going to sound harsh, but bear with me. Two things I really dislike about this, from what I look for generally from websites and services: 1. It doesn’t have any information about pricing or the business model. “Get started for free” — does it mean there are paid plans after I sign up? Does it mean it’s on best effort and might disappear suddenly if the person r…

I had to check if Help & Support is indeed linked to Discord and sadly it is. For me this is an instant turnoff. If there is no documentation but rather I am expeced to scout chat logs, I won't even start to use it. (I realize that this is a bit of a meme but it is true for me)
Post reply on HN