Dr. Campos has considerable experience with grading. He taught many science courses with pre-medical students who were obsessed with their grades. He has read many reviews which attempt to evaluate products. Some systems favor the producer. (Let's give every product 5 stars so they'll quote us and we'll get famous) Others favor the elitists. (Let's give every product 1 star so people will know how tough we are to impress.)
Dr. Campos concocted a rating system which tries to be equitable. His rating system (which the company has adopted) is as follows.
- 5 stars The best of all time. Not necessarily flawless, but so thorougly enjoyable that it could catch on and become a de facto standard due to its quality. (Not all de facto standards are 5 stars though.)
- 4 stars Very good.
- 3 stars Average.
- 2 stars Below average.
- 1 star Bad.
If we were to evaluate all products ever, the ratings would have the classic "bell shaped curve." However, we pre-select products to try (and further, which to write reviews) so you will rarely see a 2 star review.
A 3 star rating does NOT mean there is something wrong with the product. A perfectly serviceable product will get 3 stars. To get 4 stars, there has to be a lot RIGHT with a product. (And to get a 2 stars, there has to be a lot WRONG with a product.)
5 star ratings are also much rare on our scale than in popular media. If we gave "the best film this year" 5 stars, does that mean that film is equal to "the best film of all time" (also 5 stars?)
Half star ratings are also important. We tend to give "the best film this year" 4.5 stars. We'd probably never get published in popular media with this scale. (If a movie commercial said "Critic Smith gave the movie 4.5 stars!" Consumbers would believe, "There must be something wrong with it to not get 5 stars...."
Stars at the hundredth decimal place are very arbitrary. A "great movie at 4.5 stars" is qualitatively different than the "average movie at 3.0 stars." However, is there really a difference between "Movie A" that gets 3.52 stars versus "Movie B" 3.54 stars? Not really, other than the reviewer thinks they are both good movies, and slightly prefers Movie B to Movie A.
Our ratings are very broad, and that hundreth decimal place shows how arbitrary it is. A 10 scale (average rating of 5) rating makes a "Movie C" that gets a 2.4 vs "Movie D" that gets a 3.1. What's the difference??? They are both below average movies, but the numbers make you feel that movie D is qualitatively better than movie C if it has a star difference....
So this is the grammar that we use on this site. If you don't agree with our opinions, feel free to disagree. But if you email Jane and say "How could you not give "Movie E" 5 stars! It won the Oscar for Best Film this year!" Jane will reply and say "Yes, but do you think it is the best film of all time?" And you will say, "Well, maybe not of all time..." And Jane will say, "That is why it does not get 5 stars."