Well I need to give you 5 stars for that picture.

Now i'm part of the 3 star gang.
Does this mean were not Toffee Nosed?
I wonder if there is a bug were all on 3 stars lol

Nope script keeper has 4 :omg:

Nope he has three now....

Heh heh - I've just dropped from 5 to 3.
I didn't think I offended anyone

Either we have some malicious users here, or people are clicking on the 'one' star default without thinking...?

Could BE. I was a 3 then a 4 now I am down to a 2.
DRIV I just voted you a 5 and I see no change yet.

I'm thinking there may be something bonkers with the math in place to figure out the ratings... far too many 3 stars to make any sense...

Yep maybe Rick changed something not in the changelog that altered how the stars are calculated.
But hey RICK is still 5.

And I am running out of people to rate with stars.
I just noticed on topic ratings you can see I guess how many voted but not on users.
No I guess you can view number of ratings you just need to open the profile of the user.

Why, thank you sir

For me... 5+1+5=(11/3)=3.66r which either means 3 or 4 stars depending on how the star system is calculated.

I prefer to think that people 'accidentally' click on the 1 star option (rather than the alternative).

I will admit to having done this on sites where you vote for a script. There, however you can go back the next day and rectify the issue by voting again. Here, if you accidentally vote 1 instead of 5 - you are buggered.

I wonder how feasible it would be to add an edit function to the voting system? In a similar fashion to regular posts, the original poster could be allowed 24 hours to 'cool off' or just realise they have voted incorrectly.

Just a thought

Yes but looking into what I said
If you open your profile. I used the who is online. Hover over the stars you will see only three votes.
So that is three votes out of how many posts 1683. IF you look at most of the top posters (30 Days) you will see that most of them have very few votes for the rating. So it could also be that currently people are rating and the calculation is now showing up.

I guess unless someone can research this and come up with some data. Rick
WILL BE THE ONLY ONE TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION ON WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON.

The rating system has only recently been applied, so I suppose it's misleading to some / many.

In fact I think it's only just been 'activated' with this release.

BTW - A retrospective of voters identities would probably cause a minor war I think that if people want to be identified (with regards to who they vote for), it should be announced from the outset.