Curiosity about CMON made me blind

P

painting raven

New member
Okay, so have you ever wondered where you stand on CMON? What the difference beteen a 8.4 and 8.5 is? Sure the rankings are good, but out of all those artists how many are really, really good? After being struck by a mild curiosity to the questions above, I started researching the answers (plus I was burned out of painting and literally had nothing better to do) so, here\'s what I came up with (and before you say it, I know I need a life and to get out more and I\'m not really sure who would care to know all this stuff, but oh well).

All of this is based off the current rating system in place and all pictures on the site minus those with fewer then 50 votes as of July 12th, 2006 (a total of 73,228 pictures and 4029 artists).

What Ratings Mean............% of Pictures in This Category.......................# of Artists in this Category
9.1 - 10 = Amazing...................1,534 (2.09%).................................................................121
8.5 - 9.0 = Excellent..................4,449 (6.08%).................................................................298
7.5 - 8.4 = Great Job.................13,327 (18.20%)...........................................................800
6.5 - 7.4 = Good Job..................20,636 (28.18%).........................................................1248
5.5 - 6.4 = Not Bad....................20,924 (28.57%)..........................................................1100
4.5 - 5.4 = Tabletop...................9,996 (13.65%)...........................................................411
3.5 - 4.4 = Not Good..................1,815 (2.48%)..............................................................38
2.5 - 3.4 = Pretty Awful..............501 (.68%)....................................................................8 (I really feel for these folks)
1 - 2.4 = Painfully Bad................46 (.06%)......................................................................0

So there is a snapshot census of ratings, meanings, and the number of people in each category, interpret the information as you wish. Personally, I\'m off to drown my eyes in Visine :p (I really have to get out more)

I forgot to add that there are over 1148 pictures title \"another mini\" or \"une autre figurine\". More useless information to chew on....
 
F

finn17

New member
hmm..

That looks like a normal distribution curve to me but with a huge skew to the generous side???
 
E

EricJ

Active member
Interesting numbers of course, my statistical oriented mind likes numbers.

Another number, from speak with Chern Ann in chat the other day he told us the average of all scores across the entire system, out to 3-4 decimals, but it was right around 6.6

Which pretty much matches these numbers...So what about doing this same thing but for each .1

:D:D
 
M

Modderrhu

New member
Originally posted by finn17
That looks like a normal distribution curve to me but with a huge skew to the generous side???
Click to expand...
You mean a D-cup? That\'s pretty much what I thought too. Thanks, painting raven, now I know for sure that I\'m Joe Average. :~(
 
W

Wolf Fang

Member
6.5 - 7.4 = Good Job..................20,636 (28.18%).........................................................1248

thats where i am lol mor towards the 6.5 tho lol havnt yet to cross the half way mark in rankings :rolleyes:
 
P

painting raven

New member
Well I\'m glad everyone is enjoying the stats! It makes the 4-5 hours doing it feel worth something. :eek:

Personally I think this shows that the complaints that regularly show up about unfair voting are a little baseless. The spread shows that most pictures are going to rank between 5.5 and 7.4, proving that the folks doing the votes are quite forgiving. It also shows that there is really very little difference between certain point spreads. A 7.7 isn\'t much different from an 8.4 (if one is looking just at the title of \"Great Job.\", of course it does make a difference in overall artist ranking).
I was surprised though at the narrowness of the \"Excellent\" spread, which is only .5 points, versus \"Awesome\" which has a .9 spread. I would think that should be reversed.

Oh, and as for doing another one with a .1 variance, EricJ, ummmm .... no.


But, I think it would be cool it if were possible to change the browse functions to search these point spreads instead of simply 5 to 6 or 9 to 10. Just a suggestion.
 
V

vincegamer

Active member
I feel I should be getting a pat on the back as I am in the \"good job\" range.

I\'m surprised no one in the first dozen pages (when browsed in ascending order of score) has more than 5 pics up.
Do lower scoring painters get discouraged and not come back? or do they quickly rise so most of their stuff is not painfully bad?
 
P

philologus

Subgenius
Originally posted by finn17
That looks like a normal distribution curve to me but with a huge skew to the generous side???
Click to expand...

This is immediately what I thought of Finn. Statistics and I go way back and I have to do this daily at work. Sick.
 
E

EricJ

Active member
Not really skewed:

First the vote is 1 to 10, so the middle is 5.5 not 5.

Second, scores only fall between about 2.4 and 9.8, making a middle of the scoring range basically 6.1, much closer to the center of the curve at 6.5-6.6

lol not that it really matters all that much
 
Tinweasel

Tinweasel

Member
Actually, it\'s all skewed.

Given that every figure posted starts off with a 6 rating right off the bat, regardless of painting skill or figure quality, of course the distribution is going to be geared towards the middle. Unless really crappy figures get a ton of \"ugly\" votes and no \"pity\" votes, I\'m not surprised that scores under 2 are hard to come by. Likewise, stuff that should be a 10 outright with everybody voting an honest 10 (granted, likely very few and far between) gets bumped to a 9-something because of the original 6 to start.

I\'ve always wondered why figures were entered with an automatic vote to start, but figgered it has something to do with the coding of the pages and not being able to have a \"null\" entry.
 
P

penguin

New member
Interesting stuff....

...but nothing unexpected. A short while ago I was in the \"great job\" range, but I\'ve expereieced a nasty drop :(
 
T

Tony Manero

New member
normal.gif



but very \"kindly\" shifted on the right
 
Ebonbuddha

Ebonbuddha

Active member
Maybe it is because you are 13. lol

Just kidding.;)

Originally posted by Penguin
...but nothing unexpected. A short while ago I was in the \"great job\" range, but I\'ve expereieced a nasty drop :(
Click to expand...
 
H

howtofoldsoup

New member
The Rating System need to be re-vamped

I was always curious why the rating system is the way it is.

Who\'s going to go through the trouble to photograph and post an horribly painted miniature? Most people post table top quality or better. I think the scale should be more nuanced.

1 = Poor
2 = Table top quality
3
4 = Good job
5
6 = Great job
7
8 = Near Perfect
9
10 = Divine

Or something along those lines.

The only problem I see is a learning curve for new visitors on what the ratings mean. But I think we would get a better feel for how our peers evaluate our work. The data seems to support this revised rating system.

The other problem would be a programatic one. How do you divy up the original votes to fit into the new paradigm? It\'s late and the problem seems complex to me (though I\'m sure it\'s just my body wanting to sleep).

\'Soup
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back To Top
Top