Numeralize individual bias for evaluation of each Local Guide and make it public

[#1]

Star ratings are subjective and biased. Some guides wants to add 5 stars. Also, some guides want to give a lot of criticism. By digitizing these different ratios and making them public, we inform viewers of the basic personality of each Local Guide. Based on this number, the viewer can trust the sentences of the guide.

I added the opinions you gave me together. Thank you so much!

=Advantage=

• In the early stage, viewers and contributor can be used as indicators of each other's values.
• The contributor will contemplate how to add stars.
• It can prevent heavy use of 5 star and 1 star.
• Visualize whether a malicious guide is.

=Negative=

• The favor of the contributors who do not want to criticize may be judged to be of low value.
• Personality should not be quantified.
• First of all, we should abolish the five star rating.

[Raphael-Mahumane]

We really need this @YasumiKikuchi, this looks similar to what was suggested during connect Live, we hoping that we will get support on this matter and be established. 

[YasumiKikuchi]

Thanks for your comment @Raphael-Mahumane.

If It is already discussing on Connect Live as you say, I'd like to close this idea. What do you think?

[JanVanHaver]

@YasumiKikuchi I don't see the need to close the idea because it might have been discussed at Connect Live - out in the open, visible for everyone on the Idea Exchange is definitely my preferred option for any idea 🙂

As for the idea itself, I would give it a 3-star rating, if that option would be available: although I understand the goal that it is meant to achieve, I'm not sure that it is possible to draw any reliable conclusion about the personality of the person using that input.

A specific example: I have heard a local guide explain recently that he typically only writes reviews about places he really likes, as he doesn't want to waste time and energy in writing negative reviews. So he ends up with 4- and 5-star reviews only, which could easily also be interpreted as "this guy gives 5 stars to any place, which is not realistic, as he must also have come across places that were not so great... so: not trustworthy"

[YasumiKikuchi]

Thank you for your opinion @JanVanHaver. I will understand and continue the discussion as you said.

What I am thinking is to match people who sympathize with local guides and viewers.

For example, a positive thinker likes guides that are biased towards 5 stars. A critics thinker likes guides that are biased towards 1 stars. People who think biased guides are too subjective, prefer the guide of the average rating. I want to connect people who sympathize with each other, not good or bad.

I am biased as You say because I do not like criticism. I often do not post to the place I want to criticize. But the viewer will understand the action. A viewer would think "This guide probably does not want to post criticism". One sympathy occurs but it will not be a factor to lower trust. However, it will not be liked by everyone.

[Raphael-Mahumane]

Based on your recent comment @YasumiKikuchi with @JanVanHaver, you stated it very clear that we do what we do keeping in mind that for every review we write the owner might tend to attack you back if you gave a review that the owner does not like especially if they have control of their business on Google My Business, most of them they come here on Local Guide Connect to complain and try to take down the review, this also draw attation to that local guide who wrote the review and sometimes it may put the local guide at an impossible situation which might become emotional and discouraging. Best way to avoid all this is to not write a review at all or not even a star rating or just give a rating without review. 

[YasumiKikuchi]

Thanks for your opinion @Raphael-Mahumane

Your point is an understandable feeling if you have experienced management. However, is it due to the evaluation of stars? Is not it caused by depiction of criticism with immature techniques?

It is necessary to separate the problem. For ideas on how to write sentences that do not slander, I think the idea exchange here is effective.

[YasumiKikuchi]

By announcing bias in the evaluation of the guide, the guide can notice the bias of itself. In other words, we can correct 5-star and 1-star inflation due to bias. Originally the most frequent evaluation should be a 3-star. In addition there is a possibility that the evaluation which should be 4-stars or 2-stars is extremely appreciated by 5-stars or 1-star. Given the chance to be aware of it.

[KOBAYASHI_Jun]

Hi @YasumiKikuchi

That is a wonderful idea.

But really do you need this "rating" star itself?

Evaluation is personal discretion, so I think that it is good to put a rating personally, but it may be a problem to be used as an index of something.

I think if there is a mechanism where evaluation can be seen only for close friends and friends who want to share information, it is good.

-- 日本語 --

@YasumiKikuchi さん

こんばんは

素晴らしいアイデアです。

ただし、この評価（星）自体が必要でしょうか？

評価は個人の判断であるので、個人的に評価をするのはよいと思いますが、何かの指標として使われることは問題かもしれません。

親しい友人や情報を共有したい友人だけに評価が見られる仕組みがあれば良いかなと思いました。

[YasumiKikuchi]

Thank you for your opinion @KOBAYASHI_Jun 
I think that it will not be used as an indicator of individual personality as much as you are worried. The deviation of the star so much is not important. However, it is a convenient indicator used at the initial stage of quickly measuring trust due to differences in values ​​between each other. And above all, we will have a chance to think about how to add stars. The trust of that person is entirely on sentences.

私が思うにはそれほど性格の指標とはされないと思います。ゆえにこの意見を提案しました。その人の性格をあまりにも明確に計るのであれば到底採用できません。

星の指標は正確性に欠けています。しかし正確性のわりに影響力が強いのは確かなので、視覚化は不要という意見も理解できます。ただそうなると、一体誰のレビューを読めばいいのか世界中の人の時間のリソースを浪費してしまうかもしれません。ある意味において星の平均の公表は世界中の時間のリソースを節約する案でもあります。

一方で公表には問題も生じるでしょう。一律にそのガイドの性格であると主張する者が出てくるかもしれません。しかしその緊張感こそが、５つ星のインフレーションを抑制して、３つ星や４つ星に本来の価値を生み出すかもしれません。

もともと５つ星評価は中心極限定理をもとに３つ星を大多数としてどの程度偏った高評価、低評価があるのかを見るために使われますが、現実には「良い」は一律に「５つ星」が付けられ偏っています。これも見えない教育として是正できると考えています。

本来であれば「非の打ち所がない完璧」が５つ星であり、「良い所が皆無でこれ以上ないほど最悪、あるいは何らかの被害を受けた」が１つ星のはずで、そのような場所はめったにありません。他者へオススメしたい（したくない）という主張、あるいは優しさや悪意のために５つ星（１つ星）が使用されるものではないはずです。

[TravellerG]

Good suggestion, but really do not know, the technical feasibility; because, the stars are the out put of complex algorithms written over a long period, by Google. Also, it has lot of connection with SEO system?

Thanks for the initiative, dear friend, @YasumiKikuchi.