Quote:
Originally Posted by ownedbycats
This is part of the reason I switched my Calibre library to using a 10-point scale (custom ratings column with half-stars). For me, there's a vast difference between 2.5, 3, and 3.5 stars.
|
I mostly think five stars is granular enough, but the exception for me is 3.5 stars. Three stars is my baseline and books go up or down from there; however, I round down 3.5 stars to 3 and I agree there’s a vast difference between “good enough” and “quite good”. It’s occurred to me I should round up 3.5 stars to 4 and 4 stars to 5 as I almost never rate a book 5 stars, but I just don’t feel it. So there it is; imperfect but mine own.
As for the other interim steps, it would be meaningless granularity for me. Two stars means pretty junky or serious flaws or not to my taste; a combination would knock it down to one star, which also of course describes egregiously bad. As for the difference between four stars and five stars, five stars implies perfection or love, if not both. In terms of the quality of the read, there’s probably not much difference, but I know it when I read it.
