The "4 outta 5" in episode voting is useless.

[The Governor]

Just to clairfy, there IS a: 1/5, 2/5, 3/5 and a 5/5, people. [/sarcasm]

The reason I started this post is when I read a lot of episode reviews, the "4/5" option nearly wins ALL of the time. IMO at least, the show on the whole isn't a 4/5, but 2-3/5 and the sentiment in the current batch of episodes (up to the end of S20) seem to agree with this, but why is the "4/5" picked so much? I always thought the 1 thru 5 voting followed this:

1. Shit terrible
2. Poor
3. Mediocre
4. Very Good
5. Outstanding

Not counting the "hooray for everything" posters who vote 5/5 for an episode airing on time, 4/5 always wins and the sentiment for the "4" supporters usually goes like this:

"Meh, it was a typical Jean episode. 4/5"
"Wow, that was pretty damn good! 4/5!"
"Not quite up to classic standards. 4/5"
"Could fit in the classic seasons! 4/5!"
"A so-so episode, but still better than the rest of TV. 4/5"
"It's a Simpsons episode. 4/5"

For me, if it was "Meh, it was an okay episode" I'd vote a 2 or 3, but why does the vast majority of people here vote 4/5 when they should be rating higher, or lower?

[sung]

well... for me, 4/5 episode is an episode that either did reach to a reasonable amount of expectation and did not really flash the 'mediocrity' on its aspects much. it's pretty much an option that i would choose when it does not feel as strong as 5/5 material (becuase 5/5 ones do make for a good entertainment, pretty much. 4/5 episodes has its quirks for positive attention but it's not as strong as the 5/5 ones, for a subjective 'feel') but does not feel as if it's just too 'meh-ish' to be at the 3/5 range. for me, yeah, i do think many new episodes are alright and i actually don't recall too well on voting for 3/5 option on the episode that i at least thought worth something. when i see a 4/5 episode, i know that it is 4/5 material in my view

then again i guess i am kinda lenient.

[D'ohmer]

I give out 4/5s to imperfect episodes that I really enjoy as long as the faults aren't too bad. I do think most episodes are very good.

Also, when I rate my episodes, I rate based on my high Simpsons standards. If i was rating them compared to TV in general, I would bump the score up one option.

[arii]

Personally - since I tend to go or 4/5 a lot - I guess I just have higher standards?

Percentages freak me out. Anything below 80% I consider to basically be a failure. I have to really, really, really hate an episode in order to give it a 1/5 or a 2/5. A 3/5 is like, border-border-borderline acceptable for me. It's okay, a touch weak. A 5/5 is absolutely outstanding.

This tends to leave me at 4/5 - for the most part, I enjoyed it, but it had some sort of flaw or lacked a certain oomph in order for me to consider giving it a 5/5.

So by my standards, 3 or 4 is an okay episode. I guess that's it. Some people have different standards when it comes to grading as to what's really good, what's acceptable, and what's bad.

[hughes]

For me, I have a brain that will always equate 3/5 with a 60%, or an F. That's why I devised a new rating system. The poll vote is an attempted conversion, and more window dressing than anyhing else

edit: what arii said about the percentages thing

[Jesse Pinkman]

For me, if an episode has a premise I think is funny, or interesting, it gets a pre-grade of at least a B. Or if an episode has a plot I think sounds dumb or something, pre-grade would be at least a C or so. So, if an episode starts well I think, it gets a B, but it has to keep up the quality, which IMO it usually does. And if an episode I think is dumb starts off dumb but gets better, I bump by grade up. So I usually give 4/5's because an episode starts good but doesn't get perfect, or because an episode started bad and I thought it improved. I do give a 4/5 a lot, but I give 5/5's and 3/5's every now and then

[Green Man]

I think I actually give out more 3/5s than 4/5. most of the new episodes (at least this season) are alright, nothing great but had its moments so I give them 3/5. for me a 4/5 means that the episose was great but still had some flaws.

I prefer the A B C D F system. it's a lot clearer.

[Moe Nopoly]

I prefer the A B C D F system. it's a lot clearer.

i vote with that system too, i think it offers more options to rate an episode (with +/-)

[Nauru-1]

Out of all the episodes in the last five years, I think I'd only give one a 4/5 or more so I guess I'm an exception to this rule then? Of course, if someone thinks a certain era is consistently of a certain quality, I don't think having a lot of 4/5's is unreasonable.

In my case, I'd say I'd have given a lot of episodes from season 9 a 4/5. I suppose where the difference may lie is the comments and the voting not adding up in your estimation? That I can't really comment on because different people have different standards.

[Dark Homer]

i have noticed this for a long time

[Jims]

This is clearly a plea for more 5/5 voting.

[lionelhutz123]

I feel the show has produced too many episodes, for me to have a single standard rating system. Many episodes in the classic era set the bar so high, where it would seem too easy to rate everything from seasons 2-8 with 4/5's and 5/5's, leaving episodes from around seasons 10-21 with 1/5's, 2/5's, and 3/5's. When rating an episode, I split the show into 2 dimensions where the earlier portion recieves a fair grade compared to it's peer episodes, and the later half gets graded based off the comparison of it's peer episodes. So if I was to rate both "Team Homer" and "The Haw-Hawed Couple" a 4/5, that doesn't mean they share equal quality, for obviously I would prefer "Team Homer". I just think that it's kind of harsh to grant a well-written, decent episode for it's modern time a low grade just because it isn't of classic quality. Whether you like it or not, it is a different show now, and I feel it should be treated/rated like one. By the way, I still don't go easy on new episodes though. Most of the time they are at best, average (3/5, like every episode from season 20.)

[Nauru-1]

I feel the show has produced too many episodes, for me to have a single standard rating system. Many episodes in the classic era set the bar so high, where it would seem too easy to rate everything from seasons 2-8 with 4/5's and 5/5's, leaving episodes from around seasons 10-21 with 1/5's, 2/5's, and 3/5's. When rating an episode, I split the show into 2 dimensions where the earlier portion recieves a fair grade compared to it's peer episodes, and the later half gets graded based off the comparison of it's peer episodes. So if I was to rate both "Team Homer" and "The Haw-Hawed Couple" a 4/5, that doesn't mean they share equal quality, for obviously I would prefer "Team Homer". I just think that it's kind of harsh to grant a well-written, decent episode for it's modern time a low grade just because it isn't of classic quality. Whether you like it or not, it is a different show now, and I feel it should be treated/rated like one. By the way, I still don't go easy on new episodes though. Most of the time they are at best, average (3/5, like every episode from season 20.)

I can understand that, though I guess I would fall into the bolded area. To me, if an era really is of a better quality, I like to treat it as so. If a newer episode is good for its era and I've only given it a 2/5, I feel I can say how it stacks up against its peers in my review of the episode. When rating them I like to rate them all on the same scale, because I'm neurotic like that.

[The Sanest Fangirl]

I gibe 5/5 to awesome episodes that are uber funny, i use 4/5 for episode that were just as good as 5s but had some kind of flaw. Like too much exposition, lame jokes at some piont, Lisa, stupid music numbers and Itchy & Scatchy. Any one of those makes it a 4/5

[D'ohmer]

I gibe 5/5 to awesome episodes that are uber funny, i use 4/5 for episode that were just as good as 5s but had some kind of flaw. Like too much exposition, lame jokes at some piont, Lisa, stupid music numbers and Itchy & Scatchy. Any one of those makes it a 4/5

[Jacob]

A letter grade system should be standard. Anything less than 4/5 translates into an F for most people, like Animal said.

Originally Posted by Simpuramafampark
I judge episodes based on cheap jokes and nothing else. If an episode contains Lisa, it's automatically bad!

[Nauru-1]

A letter grade system should be standard. Anything less than 4/5 translates into an F for most people, like Animal said.

Depending on where one lives, only below 50% is an F and therefore just the 1s and 2s. I try to make adjustments though because in grading once you get to an F you don't really distinguish beyond that, while a 1/5 vs. 2/5 can be quite a difference.

[Jacob]

Depending on where one lives, only below 50% is an F and therefore just the 1s and 2s. I try to make adjustments though because in grading once you get to an F you don't really distinguish beyond that, while a 1/5 vs. 2/5 can be quite a difference.

Here's the problem I meant. The majority of people naturally see it as:
1/5 = bad
2/5 = bad
3/5 = bad
4/5 = average
5/5 = good, great, or excellent

when it should actually be:
1/5 = bad
2/5 = average
3/5 = good
4/5 = great
5/5 = excellent

if you use letters instead of numbers though, it works.

[zitro]

But the number system is usually used on music sites, movie sites, etc. I imagine lots of people are familiar with the standard:

1 star: crap
2 star: mediocre
3 star: good
4 star: very good
5 star: outstanding

[Disgruntled Goat]

I think I do grade modern episodes a little higher than classics, but really that's only so I don't give EVERY episode 1/5. There are only a couple of 5/5 episodes since Season 16 for me.

3/5 is currently winning on Prank and Greens, which actually makes me feel like the episode is getting underrated, even though I just rated it 3.

when it should actually be:
1/5 = bad
2/5 = average
3/5 = good
4/5 = great
5/5 = excellent

Yes, you're right. Maybe the next R&R thread should have these captions next to it to see how people actually vote. People need to realise that 2 or 3 scores are not for "massive failures".

[The Sanest Fangirl]

But mostly i do something out of 10

[Dark Homer]

i tried various approaches to rating episodes before deciding that assigning a number was stupid

i hate it when people just post a number and leave. what the hell does that even mean

[The Sanest Fangirl]

i tried various approaches to rating episodes before deciding that assigning a number was stupid

i hate it when people just post a number and leave. what the hell does that even mean

I do the number then give my reasons, usally with !!!!!!!!! in them

[TheForbiddenDonut]

anyone who only posts a number should be warned/temp banned for not following thread rules.

[TheForbiddenDonut]

[sung]

you're not helping the stereotype

[that_jeff]

For me, if it was "Meh, it was an okay episode" I'd vote a 2 or 3, but why does the vast majority of people here vote 4/5 when they should be rating higher, or lower?

People do not use the entire scale for their own system of grading.

Take Robert Canning over at IGN as an example. Even the worst of "The Simpsons" episodes can easily pull a six or seven rating out of ten. A bad episode would be about a five for him. The scale really then is more like four to ten, or five to ten instead of a ten point scale. A lot of people on here seem to be the same--a "three" is really bad while a "four" is average.

A five point scale leaves little room for differentiation. Three episodes can be average, but there is not way to really indicate which is more shit or less shit than the others.

The five point scale serves to helps to keep it simple and give an idea, but nothing more than that. It does result in strange results though. A lot of the recent episodes seem way too highly rated.

[Thrillho]

Not my system, but one that's becoming ever so common.

1/5 - Focuses on Lisa.
2/5 - She has several lines.
3/5 - Focuses on Marge.
4/5 - She has several lines.
5/5 - Focuses on Homer and/or Bart.

I feel the show has produced too many episodes, for me to have a single standard rating system. Many episodes in the classic era set the bar so high, where it would seem too easy to rate everything from seasons 2-8 with 4/5's and 5/5's, leaving episodes from around seasons 10-21 with 1/5's, 2/5's, and 3/5's. When rating an episode, I split the show into 2 dimensions where the earlier portion recieves a fair grade compared to it's peer episodes, and the later half gets graded based off the comparison of it's peer episodes. So if I was to rate both "Team Homer" and "The Haw-Hawed Couple" a 4/5, that doesn't mean they share equal quality, for obviously I would prefer "Team Homer". I just think that it's kind of harsh to grant a well-written, decent episode for it's modern time a low grade just because it isn't of classic quality. Whether you like it or not, it is a different show now, and I feel it should be treated/rated like one. By the way, I still don't go easy on new episodes though. Most of the time they are at best, average (3/5, like every episode from season 20.)

Same. Most of the post-classic episodes are incomparable to the older ones, so it doesn't really do me much use to try to grade them on the same scale. That said, nearly every episode now manages a C (about a 3/5) or lower on that. By Season 23 I'll be using a new scale.

This thread gets a 4.75/5.

[hin_01]

Whenever I look at episodes from seasons 3-8 and most of 9, I find myself liking almost every single one of them, so the worst I would give any of them (except for a few) would be a 4/5, with some getting 5/5.

I agree that it seems like the newer episodes are rated too highly. Whenever I come on here to see what people think of the new episodes, it seems like people overrate them. I mean sure, the show is better now than it was 5 years ago or so, but that doesn't mean it's up to the level of 4/5 or 5/5. I haven't seen a new episode in a long, long time that would get a 4/5 from me. It's okay to admit that the show is now of above-average quality (which is quite a step forward from where it was 5 years ago) but not even close to the level it was 15 years ago.

Even with new episodes that I think are pretty funny, they seem to lack the overall story and emotion, and I don't know how else to put this...the right touch that made seasons 3-8 so special. They crank out good episodes every once in awhile, but it's never like, "now there's an episode I wanna see again." But even when I watch "Homer the Heretic" for the 100th time, I still find myself wanting to watch it over and over again.

So yes, I think newer episodes are definitely overrated. It's probably the bias of low expectation, meaning the show dipped to such a level that just to see them put out something watchable nowadays makes it seem great.

[Mr Black]

i use grading system, or thumbs up.
this thread gets my lowest rating ever- 7 thumbs up