I have been think a lot about rating systems recently, and wondered how other people’s rating system work. The scientist in me likes to use diagrams to demonstrate this – so please bare with me as I try to explain!
My rating system is shaped a bit like this:
I would rate almost all the books in the world as one star (blue). They have no interest to me, and with any luck I won’t even start to read one of these books. Occasionally I am unlucky enough to read one, but most of those books on car engines, knitting, the benefits of plastic etc. will remain on the shelves, unread by me.
The majority of the books on my blog will be 3 or 3.5 stars (orange). These are average books. Reasonable reads, but nothing outstanding about them. If I had my time again, I probably wouldn’t read them – I like to try to find the rarer 4 star (yellow) or almost impossible to find 5 star (red) books.
I think of 5 star books as being masterpieces. They are the ones which grip you from beginning to end, alter your thinking on an issue and stay with you forever. I don’t find many of these books and they account for only a very tiny percentage of all the books ever published.
What does your rating system look like?
Are you ratings evenly spread like this?
or a less severe version of mine?
….or a different shape entirely?!
I’d love to hear what you think about this!