{"id":1739,"date":"2005-10-13T21:20:15","date_gmt":"2005-10-13T21:20:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sunpig.com\/mt-entry-1739.html"},"modified":"2006-09-23T19:30:11","modified_gmt":"2006-09-23T19:30:11","slug":"itunes-ratings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sunpig.com\/martin\/2005\/10\/13\/itunes-ratings\/","title":{"rendered":"iTunes ratings"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you look at the ratings for my quick reviews<\/a>, you’ll see that each star rating has a descriptive label associated with it. For example, a two-star rating is “Disappointing”, three stars is “Solid and enjoyable”, and four stars is “Recommended”. I use these extra descriptions as guidelines for myself when I’m assigning a rating, to try and keep ratings consistent over time. I have a tendency to be over-generous with ratings, and I need a way to keep myself grounded.<\/p>\n

I realized this morning, though, that I don’t have a similar set of descriptions for the star ratings I give to music in my iTunes library. I’ve just been dishing out stars because of what the music feels like at the time, without giving much thought to why it ends up with a particular rating. With only five choices (1-5 stars, no in-betweens), you’d think that the options would be limited enough to eliminate most grey areas, but now that become aware of what I’m doing, it feels haphazard. I’m not a compulsive categorizer, but it feels nice to have some kind of a system for when I do want to rate things. So here are my new definitions for assigning music ratings:<\/p>\n