IMDb needs to put out guidelines for ratings.

I'm somewhat a connoisseur of bad movies. I don't rate a lot of movies below 3 but there are some that definitely deserve it. Anything like Manos, Hands of Fate or Plan 9 from Outer Space or any of the Leprechaun movies. But, the again, I search out bad movies to watch. Some aren't as bad as their reputation, but most are.

Series: Extremely cringeworthy, watched 1 episode only.

Just out of curiosity, do you vote for an entire series if you've only seen one episode? If I've seen one (or a few) episode(s) for a series, I vote for the specific episode(s), but not the series as a whole.
I personally have the same rule as bderoes, I don't vote for something I haven't seen completely.

Abi, I know you reserved it for some titles. But that still means that in some cases, you vote for a series while you've only seen 1 episode. So to me, it appears you are one of these people who are able to judge a book by its cover (and first chapter). :) 

Marco, go play with your buddy Professor Kent, or the new troll from Iran.

Abi, no need to worry. This will be my last reply to you ever. I would appreciate it if you would ignore me as well from here on.

Marco, go play with your buddy Professor Kent, or the new troll from Iran.

Abi, no need to worry. This will be my last reply to you ever. I would appreciate it if you would ignore me as well from here on.

I've watched the entire runs of both Batwoman and Black Lightning. Neither are political propaganda. The fact that you think so says more about you than the series themselves. Both are subject to troll fan boy voting that are against anything other than white, straight, male superheroes. More comments like this will probably lead to this thread being closed or the offending posts removed.

I've watched the entire runs of both Batwoman and Black Lightning. Neither are political propaganda. The fact that you think so says more about you than the series themselves. Both are subject to troll fan boy voting that are against anything other than white, straight, male superheroes. More comments like this will probably lead to this thread being closed or the offending posts removed.

Ed, freedom of speech does not apply to hate speech. It's not a difficult thing to understand. Also, you use "politically correct" as a slur but what you really mean is "why do I have to treat everyone the way I want to be treated".

Calling out bigotry is always called for. You know that and just disagree because you are part of the problem.

Actually, it's not full of assumptions. You are pushing something that isn't politically correct. Diggle is no more developed than Black Lightning and I would say Black Lightning is a whole lot more developed than Diggle who is just a sidekick to the main white hero.

The same can be said for Sara Lance. She's really not all that developed, at least originally on Arrow and she is more part of an ensemble on Legends than Batwoman who is the focus of a show. People accept sidekicks and ensemble casts much more readily than they do lead actors who need to usually fall in to line with "norms".

Also, no one assumed you were white. But, there are legions of fan boys who are white, straight men who downvote these series. There are articles exploring this topic about rotten tomatoes.

You can also explore the flaws of series without trying to slur them as "politically correct". Saying that you vote them 1 due to "political correctness" shows more a bias on your part than it says anything about the series, especially if you have only watched a handful of episodes. You aren't saying the series are bad. You are saying they don't meet your worldview which is not a good way to judge art.

Your Ratings:
https://www.imdb.com/list/ratings/
- - -
Advanced Title Search
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/
User Rating between 1 and 2 (Sorted by Popularity Ascending)
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?user_rating=1.0,2.0
4,759 titles.
User Rating of 10 (Sorted by Popularity Ascending)
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?user_rating=10.0
3,329 titles.
.

When I use a "5 ratings" systems, there is how I picture it.

1 = Unwatchable Correspond to a rating of 1, 2
2 = Horrible Correspond to 3, 4, Low 5
3 = Bad/Average Correspond to High 5, 6, Low 7
4 = Good/Very Good Correspond to a rating of High 7, 8, Low 9
5 = Masterpiece Correspond to a rating of High 9, 10 

On  a 10 Rating system:

1 = Worst movies of all time

2 = At the edge of being one of the worst movies of all time.

3 = Horrible

4 = DON't watch it even for free

5 = VERY BAD

6 = BAD/AVERAGE

7= High average/Good

8 = Highly Good/Very Good

9 = Excellent/Masterpiece Contender

10 = BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME/ MASTERPIECE

My problem with this is that 5-6 should be considered average, not bad. The vast majority of my ratings are 6 which for is fairly average.

My average is rating 6,35. I think that it makes sense that 6 is average.

According to an analysis done in 2009, the average on IMDb is 6,38 so I believe that my ratings are perfectly fine.

This thread alone kinda tells how differently people see these ratings. That’s why they’re often a bit meaningless.

They can be fun for the person who actually rates films (since he/she has some own ”system” behind it), but for the others trying to guess what they actually mean... perhaps not so much. I guess that’s why people usually write the reviews before rating them.

Eboy,

I find individual's ratings mostly useless. The thing I like about sites like IMDb is that the aggregate is useful. I'm rarely surprised by a movies rating as the aggregate rating (assuming enough votes) is usually a pretty good indicator of the quality of the title. Of course, there is always personal taste involve. I personally despise Modern Family despite the overall ratings and awards its won.

I really wish that IMDb gave what your overall rating for titles is. 46% of my titles are rated as 6. Statistically, according to IMDB, I rate 0% of titles as a 1 or 10. Though, in reality it is 0.04% as 1 and 0.1% as 10s.

Yeah, sure, I see what you mean. I personally just feel that there’s a lot of ”fan service” going on with IMDb’s user ratings. Meaning, that if you’re a ”fan” of something, you’re most likely bound to give a higher score. Marvel and Star Wars movies are often rated pretty high (they’re often great entertainment, don’t get me wrong, but still just solid ”3 stars” usually for me), but then people are overly critical to some more serious drama movies.

Then again, who am I to judge. I have rated exactly one movie in IMDb. The Polish Moomins got 10/10. Not a big fan of 1-10 scale, as already said before. Maybe I would rate them more often with 5 star rating. Dunno.

IMDb's ratings try and take bias into account. That's why they don't use straight average of vote but some statistical analysis. Stats really isn't my area of expertise but I understand the fundamentals of it.

Also, there are probably just as many haters as there are fanboys. I try to watch stuff with an openmind but it is impossible to tell if I'm successful.

It won't change my rating system and my perception of IMDb ratings.

For me, the average movies are average which shows that 6 is average and sometimes Bad, but most often "bad" than  "average". 

I see film ratings are like school grading. 60% or 6 is passable so the movie is way below what I consider good, but it is enough good to be watched, but it is still bad. 

Below 60%, the movie is not passable which means that it is not passable in other words. Not good enough for me.

100% or 10/10. I don't think that the way I see my rating system it would exist but I believe that it is necessary in a statistical point of view,  Cinema is subjective and I have never seen any "Perfect" movie in my life. One day or another, I will find flaws in any movie, I use it only to mark the movie that I believe is the best ever made, but it doesn't that this movie is "perfect".

On the other hand, the rating 1 has a reason to exist since sometimes in movies, you see that the freaking producers/director/actors knew that their movie was trash as hell but they didn't care one bit because what they care about is money,  not quality. In other words, all they want is that you buy their movie, they don't think a second about making it watchable.

When I see that they released a movie purposely knowing that everyone would hate it, it enrages me. Basically movies rated 1, are films, but they don't fit in the definition of cinema. 

Marvel movies are business, and that is one of the reasons why I dislike most of them. But, at the very least they make an effort to make the movie watchable and enjoyable. If they realize during production that the movie is a pain to watch they will reshoot some scenes. but that doesn't happen when you have producers/directors that come  into a movie with 0 interests in the quality

Then there is movies that I refuse to rate.

It happened 1 time for movies and a few times for videogame.

I refuse to rate videogames where there is no artistic effort of any sort.

Example: 

Crappy free videogames on crappy internet game sites.

I refuse to rate videogames that aren't a videogame.

Example:

Roblox, (In itself Roblox is not a video game, it contain videogames created by multiples users. Basically, it is only a host site for videogames.)

I refuse to watch/rate what I call "sexploitation".

Example:

Fifty Shades of Grey (These movies don't even have a screenplay, or the screenplay is only a pretext to hide what the true purpose of the movie.)

I refuse to rate ads

No example (Whatever Orson Welles said about the efficacity of ads in delivering a message in less than 30 sec, I don't care. Ads aren't cinema, and they don't even try to hide it, they are are pure business. If I was forced to rate ads, I wouldn't give them a 1 star because at the end of the day, they don't try to hide the fact that they are selling you, I find that reasonable.

I refuse to rate propaganda

If it is pure propaganda, I will refuse to rate it. Some movies are on the edge, but as far as you don't cross the line.

I refuse to rate Youtube video

I rate youtube video on youtube, I rate movies on IMDb, they are two separate worlds that shouldn't be confused with each other.

Basically, I refuse to rate anything that is against my perception of the arts.