Sort by IMDb Rating feature has recently changed

@Col_Needham​ Thank You.

(I went to the other thread and voted for that enhancement.)

@MSebring​ 

I see what you say about sorting by year within the average rating, but not by the title.

Look under the 8.6 ratings, where 2 films appear from 1991:

25. The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

26. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)

Based on this example, the ratings descend, the years ascend, and the titles descend?

Same in the 8.5s:

50. The Lion King (1994)

51. Léon: The Professional (1994)

But in the 8.4s:

64. Paths of Glory (1957)

65. Witness for the Prosecution (1957)

and here the year doesn't stay together:

85. Avengers: Infinity War (2018)

86. Avengers: Endgame (2019)

87. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)

88. Joker (I) (2019)

???

You're right. It appears that I was mistaken about the title being a third sort field.
Within each year, they appear to be sorted randomly. (At least I don't see a pattern.)

And as you point out, there are a few other anomalies (cases where the year sequence
isn't quite right). As a general rule though, it appears that each generic rating is now
sorted by year.

@MSebring​  Thanks, however, no such extra precision beyond one decimal place exists in the IMDb ratings (there's a thread from 2016 which mistakenly assumed the same thng).  The back-end search has been updated and titles are indeed displayed in a different order, but the old order was not a secret extra level of precision.  We are looking at making the new secondary order a little more clear and explainable. 

Since the previous sort sequence used to change gradually over time I mistakenly assumed 
that they were sorting the rating with greater precision (more than one digit to the right of

the decimal point). Now that I've read that other thread it appears that what has actually

happened is they've changed the secondary sort field from popularity to the title number
from the URL (a sequence which is usually the same as release year sequence).

It would be preferable if they could sort the average rating with greater precision, but

if that's not possible, it would be nice if they could change the secondary sort field back
to popularity since (like the rating) that at least has something to do with preference,

while the new secondary sort field does not.

Some additional information: The other thread referred to has to do with results lists
returned by Advanced Title Searches while the problem I reported has to do with User

Created Lists, but I am assuming (because of what I read in that thread) that in both
cases, when sorted by IMDB rating, the secondary sort field used to be popularity.

I just did an Advanced Title Search and sorted the results list by User rating,

and it appears that the secondary sort field for that list has also been changed

to what appears to be the title number, but the sequence is the opposite of 
the User Created Lists (descending instead of ascending).

Advanced Search Results List  (sort=user_rating)
The Dark Knight                 2008  9.0
LOTR: Return Of The King  2003  9.0
Schindler's List                   1993  9.0
The Godfather, Part II        1974  9.0
12 Angry Men                    1957  9.0

My User Created List  (sort=user_rating)

12 Angry Men                    1957  9.0

The Godfather, Part II        1974  9.0

Schindler's List                   1993  9.0

LOTR: Return Of The King  2003  9.0
The Dark Knight                 2008  9.0

@Col_Needham​ 

When you decide on the method, and publish the explanation, could you include whether a rating displayed as 6.8 reflects titles with ratings 6.80 through 6.899..., or instead ratings 6.75 through 6.849..., in other words, whether the 2nd digit is truncated or rounded. 

One sentence (by a user) in the thread from 2016 you linked above assumed the rating was truncated after the 1st decimal place: "As an example, titles with 8.29 should be sorted higher than those with 8.21."

@bderoes​ Ah, we can answer that now -- the ratings are rounded. 

@Col_Needham​ 

Glad to hear it.

I'd like to register my support of expanding the sort to more decimal places. 

Frankly, I'd love to rate titles with more precision myself, at least with +/-/neither added to the number 1-10.

Thanks for the clarification, and please include it whatever official explanation will be on the Help center.