Score bombing of unreleased title by 2 "top 1000s voters" & "Non-US users"

  • 16
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Not a Problem
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members.

*Another* "Top 1000 voters" & "Non-US users" had appeared today on The Carrington Event. I am in US and this film is not available to public. This dropped the 3.0 score to 2.1. This film is *not released* and not available. How did they see it? They didn't. They are score bombing. I'd like both scores removed and it looked into. And who gives a film with 30 votes a 1 anyway? Only someone that bombs it. The absolute toughest critic might score it a 6. it's a good flick. Anyway I've put in request to have it listed as in "post-production" i hope this resolves it for now. But I'm sure I'll have to complain in the future when they return to bomb the title for whatever reason.
Photo of Rob Underhill

Rob Underhill

  • 9 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes

Posted 7 years ago

  • 16
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Well I spoke too soon it seems. In the few hours that my score was back up to a whopping 9.8, I tried to change my personal vote (which is worth more now since I've been voting for tons of stuff) to get the rating to an average that reflects what people have been voting (high) but not so high as to attract troll voters. but it was too late, in the time before the score could update (seems to be a few hours) a "top 1000" "US" member voted it a "3", bringing the weighted average to 7.0. Again I would eat my hat if they have actually seen the movie. at least 7.0 isn't bad. but again it doesn't reflect what people have been voting but it just goes to show that the rating system is broken and gives too much power to top users who obviously can't use it responsibly.


I'm afraid that with 10 votes at 52% and only two reviews giving it a 7 and 8 (and no discussion, which you might expect if this is one of the greatest films ever) it will, to some people, look like vote stuffing:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1844728/r...

I'm afraid that you are going to have to expect some of these votes (and, again, IMDB can't tell if the Top 1000 Voter who gave it a 3 saw the film or not and just didn't like it, although it could be they look into this and find a suspicious pattern of behaviour but they don't want to make it open house for film-makers to remove genune low votes) and the best thing you can do is wait for more votes to come in (home media release? streaming release?) and that will tend to even it out. You could waste a lot of time and effort over this (and get stressed), which may only end up attracting trolls who see they can get a reaction by throwing in low votes (so you may end up stuck in a nasty loop, the more effort you make to police these votes, the more it attracts further bad votes).
Photo of Adam Watson

Adam Watson

  • 20 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I do expect a degree of low votes, even by people who haven't seen and just dislike the idea of the movie. Also, I'm happy with the score where it is now and think it's fair. In fact at this point I'm NOT asking that the new malicious vote be removed.

What my complaint is that the system is still broken and needs fixing, something that this episode revealed to me. We got people who had seen the movie but hadn't voted yet to do so (and we didn't tell them what to vote, just to vote if they liked it) and increased the vote count by 50%. But that had little effect because their votes aren't "worth" anything. My producers and even my wife began voting for tons of things to increase the value of our votes, something that was amazingly far more effective in significantly changing the score than just getting new votes. Something that I feel is fair to do, why shouldn't we vote on things anyway? but even if what we were doing was fair, we were admittedly manipulating the system in a way that we would have never thought to do, all because one lone individual manipulated that system against us. IMDB's rating system gives too much power to people with too much time on their hands and no investment in the work represented on the database. THAT'S what needs to get fixed.

They removed the malicious "1" vote, great, now make the real fix. Reduce the "weight".
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
I agree, although I suspect it might not be the weighting itself but the algorithm that doesn't seem to cope well with U-shaped voting distributions (as opposed to the normal bell-shaped). Whatever is the actual problem (and it might be a mix of both), it needs addressing.
Photo of Manu

Manu

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hi

I have the exact same issue. Released my short that hasn't been broadcasted yet so little people have seen it, and suddenly a "top 1000 voter" put a 1/10 to the film and the film gets a final 1.6 grade...

This voter is in the US and therefore I hardly see how he could have seen my film since I live in Europe... Obviously somebody who tries hard to stay in the top 1000.

What can we do about it??

The film is here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2419502
Photo of MoviePeep

MoviePeep

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
We are having this same issue on two of our films. The 1's were removed, now they are back, this time female. Here's the simple solution. Bottom line, people don't do underhanded things when they know they will be held accountable. If you make it so that 9's and 10's and 1's and 2's must have their user name posted next to the rating, then it will be obvious if stuffing is going on and obvious if trolling is going on. #'s 3-8 give an area where no film can be totally tanked (which can ruin a small indie film trying to find a buyer) by unnamed voters. You have to have user names to post on forums, why not for high and low votes. It would nip this problem in the bud. IMDb admins won't have to field queries like these from filmmakers AND the trolls would leave a trail very easy to follow.

I've only watched 1 film in my entire life that I thought deserved a 1. I watch more movies a year than I can count, and still have only found one film worthy of a 1. I've seen Rob Underhill's work BTW and it's good. Well shot, no sound issues, etc.
Photo of Manu

Manu

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Guys let's not fight about it.

I think we can agree that "score bombing/tanking" or whatever the word is giving can be positive or negative.

We're talking about small titles here, who haven't had yet - and will probably never - have a huge exposure.

What happens for those titles:
- Few people who have seen the film, it's been in a few festivals and yes of course the voters might know the director etc since the film have had little exposure, and yes they are biaised and they give a high rate (although you have to recognize that the film can be great sometimes ;) It's pretty natural, and you don't have to accuse people: in my case for example I haven't asked anything to anybody, 8 people have decided on their own to rate the film.

---> IMDB system is working well in this case, giving them a low weight. Nothing to complain about, it's fair!

- On top of this you have those "masked avengers" are browsing IMDB, and rate 1/10 a film they HAVEN'T SEEN since the film has not been in festivals in their country. They vote so much on so many films (that they probably haven't seen either) that they have a huge power and can outweight almost 100 of those "friends from the director".

---> The result is, in my case, that somebody whom I don't know or little and is interested in my title will go on IMDB and see: "12 users gave an average rate of 1.8/10 to this film". Not a great way to start a career...

It's not fair either don't you agree? IMDB should give them a low weight as well.

You see? The weight system is good, it's great that IMDB is doing this. But it has to work both ways. A single user should not be able to artificially overrate a film, but should not have the power to tank it forever either. Especially when he hasn't seen the film...

Don't you agree?
Photo of MoviePeep

MoviePeep

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sir Simeon, read. No where in my post did I trash someone who gave a 7. I spoke only of ppl giving 1 & 2 and 9 & 10. I also just mentioned I had seen Rob's work. If you read the first post, he was having problems with 1's. It would be wonderful if people actually read a post before jumping on someone. Manu is exactly right. For small indie films, that troll rating can ruin a film's chances of being sold, shown etc. All I did was suggest a method that would prevent BOTH stuffing AND trolling. Chill.
Photo of Mike Ratel

Mike Ratel

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
My documentary on lawn mower racing, On Your Mark, Get Set, MOW! has been hit by a female aged 18-29. One day I have 11 votes with a score of 8.5 and the next day there is one more vote and the score is 2.1 It's been 9 months since there has been a public screening. I hope that IMDB.com will finally resolve this issue.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2254085/?...
Photo of GOD

GOD

  • 18 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Your documentary has 8 rating on IMDB .
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Yeah, it looks like the problematic vote has been removed.
Photo of Mike Ratel

Mike Ratel

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
It wasn't removed but the rating went back up to 8. Now, without any new votes my rating is now 5.9.
Photo of SirSimeon2003

SirSimeon2003

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The rating has been higher than 7 since you posted 4 days ago (and had an 8 rating for 3 of the 4 days).

And a Top 1000 Voter voted the film an EIGHT, not 1..........

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2254085/r...

16 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 7.7 / 10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2254085/r...

1 Top 1000 voters have given a weighted average vote of 8.0 / 10
Photo of Matt Richards

Matt Richards

  • 5 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
It's happened on both my short films. I honestly thought it was score bombing. NOW I am 99% sure it is bots doing the voting.. or people who want to be top 1000 voters using a script that goes and auto votes randomly for them. The only way to fix this problem is to remove the weighting on top 1000 voters. That way the voting on small films that will probably only ever get a maximum of 40 votes will be fair.

Here are my two ruined ratings.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2118626/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2049394/

In my opinion IMDB needs to sort this out urgently. This top1000 vote-weighting undermines the whole point of using imdb in the first place.
Photo of SirSimeon2003

SirSimeon2003

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
A voter who is a Top 1000 Voter voted "First Contact" 10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2118626/r...

1 Top 1000 voters have given a weighted average vote of 10 / 10

A voter who is a Top 1000 Voter voted "Automata" 9:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2049394/r...

1 Top 1000 voters have given a weighted average vote of 9.0 / 10

One Top 1000 voter voted 9
Photo of Matt Richards

Matt Richards

  • 5 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
^ that changed within hours of me posting. I think the best bet for IMDB is to disable top 1000 voters ratings on all titles with less than 50 votes.
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
Can't think of a down side to that, though maybe just disable their extra weight. I don't think it's right that the cast and crew, and maybe a small audience, could vote but any group of other user cannot. If it stops having much impact, though, they'd probably think it's a waste of time to go out looking for these films and "equalizing" the voting.

It's a shame so many folks are having to figure this out, though, just because some idiot's gotten "power" he doesn't deserve!
Photo of Surendra Mohan

Surendra Mohan

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
I think it would be far better if top 1000 voter category is removed and it's status is given to top 1000 reviewer's votes. A reviewer is less likely to be a troll bomber than a top voter who wants to maintain his top 1000 voter status by bombings votes to such unseen movies.
Photo of Scott

Scott

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The fact that you are not a filmmaker makes everything make sense. and again, i can not reiterate this in any other words, but us filmmakers don't want to make any more suggestions. It's time to create change. At least bring an awareness to the site as they DON'T know what is going on. Change.org has proven success and makes corporations pay attention to issues when they are ignored at a local or personal level.

As to why anyone would do such a ridiculous thing? It's tough to say. Still asking myself that based on your comments.
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
By the way, tons of users' suggestions get implemented all the time on the site (with or without a petition being made on other sites). I've had suggestions of mine implemented and I've also suggested other peoples' ideas be sent to the old "suggestion" form and seen them implemented. I'd bet money this is being worked on, as we speak and since some of the votes were removed, it's clear staff is aware (with or without a petition on another site).
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Before this gets too silly, I reworked Surendra Mohan's idea into a suggestion (any mistakes and errors or undue emphasis or bias are all my own fault):

https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...
Photo of Manu

Manu

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
:) Well done Emperor
Photo of Dan Dassow

Dan Dassow, Champion

  • 13450 Posts
  • 13795 Reply Likes
The idea has merit and is workable with some minor refinement.
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Those of you who are not Indie filmmakers do not seem to realize that the 9 & 10 ratings an Indie film may receive are from people who actually SAW the film at a premiere or festival. It is hardly vote stuffing when it's votes from people who SAW the film. Voting on a film you have not seen simply to "correct" what MUST be an error (again on a film you have never seen) ranks right up there with having a HUGE Napoleonic God complex. How could you possibly know a little Indie film wasn't absolutely fantastic if you never viewed it. With today's technology you do not need a huge budget to make an outstanding film.

A kind rating from someone who has viewed the film is legitimate, as is an unkind rating from someone who has viewed the film. A score bomb from a troll who has never seen the film, who is only interested in a "top 1000" ranking or "righting the world" in NOT legitimate. Indie films, especially shorts Don't have the same audience as big budget films and can't be viewed in the same way.

I prefer the way Amazon votes are cast simply because people are less likely to do things like this when a) there is effort involved and b) your name is attached to it.

Two of my daughter's films received 2 "1" rankings from the same 2 people on the same day. Neither film was playing that day or week or the week before, or the week before that. There is no way the same 2 people saw BOTH films and felt compelled to rank them each a "1" on the same day within minutes. I don't so much care to have the 1's removed, I'm fine with leaving them if the score can just be adjusted to not give the 1's more weight than a 10.

Both are multi award winning films. Made by (at the time) a 12 year old.
"ROTFL" just won against adults at the AFF and "Cardboard" just won TWO Telly Awards, so obviously the films have some merit. I have no qualms with someone not liking a film...just watch it first, please. Thx.

These are the 2 films which have the same 2 trolls
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2081199/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2294783/
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
With all due respect, if someone doesn't want to stand behind a rating they've given, they shouldn't give it. I didn't say they should change to Amazon's format, only that I like that format better. There seems to be no shortage of reviews or ratings on that site BTW. I never said a filmmaker was any better than anyone else, only that Indie filmmakers understand the Indie film world and take care when rating other Indie films. - Take care :)
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
But, they take no more care than I, or Emperor, for example, do...right? I, also, can stand behind what I've rated without making a written review. I don't write well, though I've done many reviews. I owned video stores, back when there were video stores (and they specialized in indie, foreign, etc...by the way), and wrote five or six reviews per week for our hand out, introducing our customers to things they won't see by on television ads. I could do it, but to do it right, it would take too much of my time. I've rated thousands of films, but wouldn't rate any if I was required to review it. I am sure the bulk of the population feels the same. Many might do it but not do it well enough to matter.

That's all I am saying. I am sure there are indie film makers who would take less care in voting than you think. In a Help Board thread, one admitted to the inflated ratings and he changed his rating and asked those close to him to re-consider theirs. That's as a result to this same type of discussion. So, don't think the ratings given by film makers, their friends and families are perfect either.

But thanks for putting ideas out there and for being willing to discuss them.

True story..at my store, we used to have "employee picks" with short reviews and a customer pointed and asked, "what makes you people think any of us give a s*&t what you think of a movie???" My store manager and me just looked at each other...pause...then, looking at the new release shelf, he asked "so...what's good in here??" I think we hooked him up with something really special!
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I think he said he thought he rated his own film too high, which I'm ok with, a film is like your child, you should like it better than anyone. I just mean that Indie filmmakers know how limited our audience is and that no Indie short film is able to withstand intentional score bombing. There will never be enough votes (as there are with large studio films) to compensate for someone being a dork. For many Indie Filmmakers ( my daughter included) the sale of a feature based on your short, or a college scholarship or an Ex. Producer's funding for your next project can be impacted by a low score on IMDb.

This is a job for us. I hardly think ANYONE would think it was cool if random people who never witnessed your skill at your job suddenly were able to rate your job performance and that then had an impact on your pay. That's what I mean by Indie filmmakers get this point. Unless you've been in our shoes you can't understand how frustrating it is. That's all. :)
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
Yeah, that's true. I think I said, "it's expected from you...and maybe Mom and Dad" and I don't think many would argue with that.

I agree with everything you just said. Just of note, I've been with companies who evaluated us by things out of our control, limiting my pay increases. I've experienced street repairs causing loss of traffic into my store, causing me to lose a bonus. I also got laid off three times with the US economy and housing crash. So, yeah, I get that. Further I've had to handle customers who were stealing, to which I had proof, including video, to end up getting written up, which affects the next evaluation. Probably many businesses/jobs have the same thing, to some extent. I caught a man trying to return merchandise our company did not carry and questioned him vigorously, got as much info as possible, since he'd probably done it before, then told him to leave and never return. He reported me for being racist against him and I got written up. I explained he is the same race as my wife, children, stepmother, best friend, many neighbors, etc., and they said the write up stays, because I allowed myself to be perceived that way. Also, at another company, when people complained, they'd give out gift cards for future purchase. So, frequently people would come into the store, ask for the manager, ask the manager for the district manager, then ask the district manager for the regional manager, give the district managers' name and complain about something/anything and be given a gift certificate. None of those involved had any contact with the person, but would get written up. Having write ups usually means no raise. No raises or promotions means it's harder to get the next job. So, you're not alone, by any means. That said, if anyone is using IMDb to make such decisions, he/she is a fool. I am sure most of them consider it with a grain of salt and don't go solely on IMDb ratings, especially if it has just a few votes.

There are, in this day and age, many ways to get a film seen and then hopefully rated, to counter one voter, though...so, hopefully they'll take away this rating system and it will make it easier to overcome.
Photo of Scott

Scott

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
people use imdb to make decisions. everyone asks me for my imdb link when applying to jobs. people in the industry aren't the brightest, at least according to s.s. : https://vimeo.com/65060864
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Those of you who are not Indie filmmakers do not seem to realize that the 9 & 10 ratings an Indie film may receive are from people who actually SAW the film at a premiere or festival. It is hardly vote stuffing when it's votes from people who SAW the film.


We aren't saying it is actual vote stuffing, only that one of the motivations might be someone thinking they are "correcting" for it. It may be that they are just hammering in 1 star votes on everything without any thought as to what the film is (although quite why you'd waste your time for no reason is unclear, but perhaps they'd rather do that than play Angry Birds) - it'd only become visible on films with a small number of votes. Unfortunately, trying to actually guess what their motivation is can only go so far, as no one has yet admitted they do this.

A score bomb from a troll who has never seen the film, who is only interested in a "top 1000" ranking or "righting the world" in NOT legitimate.


In all the discussion there has been, here and on the IMDB forums, I can't recall anyone saying that such score bombing is a good idea.

I prefer the way Amazon votes are cast simply because people are less likely to do things like this when a) there is effort involved and b) your name is attached to it.


There's be a riot if IMDB tried that, you'd be punishing the hundreds of thousands of ordinary users (who like rating films, if only so they can check what they though of a film, if, for example, you wanted to give out some recommendations) for the misdeeds of only a handful of people. It might even make vote manipulation easier on a larger number of films. The suggestion I post seems to be the best compromise this side of removing the weightings completely (which I wouldn't be against, although I can see a good argument for keeping them).

I don't so much care to have the 1's removed, I'm fine with leaving them if the score can just be adjusted to not give the 1's more weight than a 10.


To be honest, it'd be simpler just to get them removed. I agree a fix is required, but that could take a while to sort out. I do kind of hope that they'd scrub someone's full voting history if they found a pattern of such activity, but I am unsure if they do (I'd assume the problem would disappear if they did, unless there are far more people at it than we'd think).
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm totally open to any fix they come up with. Something, anything is better than the current system. :)
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
True to that, FPF!
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Indeed - if nothing else, this demonstrates that the system is not working to just about anyone's satisfaction and needs sorting out.
Photo of Brian McDonnell

Brian McDonnell

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm having a similar problem, my film got one vote of 4, so it's score is displayed as 4.7, even though my mean is 8.7. My 4 voter wasn't a Top 1000 though. It's not a 1 vote so it might not be a troller. Is it's an honest opinion then fair enough, but I don't get why my rating has to be 4 lower than it should be?
Photo of Brian McDonnell

Brian McDonnell

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Here's the voting (granted only 7, but as written above, the visible rating is important for marketing etc.)

4 57.1% 10
1 14.3% 9
1 14.3% 8
0 7
0 6
0 5
1 14.3% 4
0 3
0 2
0 1
Arithmetic mean = 8.7. Median = 10

and here's the film link http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2446612/
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
Thanks. It seems a couple of your higher votes, 8 & 9, I think, don't carry weight (no demographic data) and so the 4 means more. It just highlights that this weighted system does not work until there are more votes. If you can get more folks to see and rate (links to it on facebook...make it available on Indies film sites....it will help. That might help you take it to the next level. In the mean time, maybe making that vote grid as visible as the weighted, manipulated rating might be a fair "fix," and till then, hope people click and look that far on their own!
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
The sad thing is, this isn't down to scorebombing by Top Voters, this is just an issue with the weightings (I genuinely can't figure out how that result is arrived at, unless the people with no demographic information are discarded completely and then perhaps a sliding scale of weighting is applied, presumably based on the number of votes someone has - t stop people signing up just to stuff the ballot box)). It is a clear sign the minimum number of votes for a rating needs raising. I suspect most film-makers would rather not have any weighted rating rather than this.

As BMSF says, the only solution (other than IMDB changing the weightings) is to get more people to watch the film and suggestion they throw it a vote on IMDB - uploading it to Withoutabox would put it in the page and then posting on the short film forum would get more views from IMDB voters with solid voting histories, which might turn things around.
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
and, suggesting voters submit demographic info, too! With the way things are nowadays and folks' reluctance to give real info, it's silly to ignore votes based on that (unless it's that Yotta Kasai dude!
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
I'm afraid it is probably a god way to catch vote stuffing - if someone signed up dozens of accounts or encouraged 100s of strangers to pop on and give their project a 10 vote, this would tend to pick it up.
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I really think IMDb just needs to inable the voting for short films. My daughter's films have been to 80+ festivals and even with all of the exposure her films have had, we only have an average of 24 votes per film...which means her films will NEVER, EVER be able to withstand random IMDb users who scorebomb to keep their status up.

No matter how hard we try (and with 80 festivals under her belt, I think my daughter has done a bang up job of publicizing her short films) we will never have the traffic as a big budget film. Seeing as investors and colleges DO look at the film's IMDb page and use that info as part of the way they evaluate things - It's my opinion that the only fair way to protect short filmmakers and keep IMDb from having to redo their formula on how they figure things is to just INACTIVATE the voting for SHORT films. Keep the review option there, people can take the time to go on and write a review, but robots won't be doing that.
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
I really think IMDb just needs to inable the voting for short films.


That wouldn't be fair on short films that have got a higher profile, where they get enough reviews to give a balanced assessment.

It is a good argument for increasing the minimum number of votes to say 100:
https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
That's a good idea - min. 100 votes before score is public.
Photo of Tupac Amaru

Tupac Amaru

  • 51 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
+1 if like that ideea
Photo of Mike Ratel

Mike Ratel

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
It seems as though On Your Mark, Get Set, MOW! has been attacked again by people with nothing better to do by giving it a couple of 1 votes.
Photo of Victoria Masina

Victoria Masina

  • 36 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
I have the same problem!! I hate this stupid "weighed" voting thing. Totally biased pro 1 and 2 voters. My film Grooming Giselle hasn't even been released yet. The positive votes it got are from the few cast and crew who've watched it with their family and friends. The negative votes: mostly non-US users --- HUH? go figure, and a fat 2 from a "top 1000" voter which happened shortly after I wrote a complaint to IMDB about these bogus non-US 1 votes. I was extremely upset and that obviously upset the dude at the "help desk". I bet my left arm it was either him or someone he enticed to vote a 2 on a yet to be released film. They are manipulating it, how can that be the fair way? Can't we do anything about this? It's ruining reputations and keeping who knows how many people from buying your films once it is released. That should be illegal. It's slander IMO.
Photo of Mike Ratel

Mike Ratel

  • 4 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
My documentary, On Your Mark, Get Set, MOW! had a problem with this and after stating it in this forum it was cleaned up. Once again, a couple of "1" votes have sunk my average from 7.7 to a 5.5. The reason why it is so critical to fix this is because festivals and TV acquisition people see these poor scores and likely going to pass on your film. IMDB.com, I love you but ya gotta fix this! If the majority of my scores are 8s one would think that anyone who rated a film 1 is a bitter person with nothing else better to do with their time.
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My daughter's film "OperHator" has 7 votes. 6 are 10's and 1 is a 4. The rating is 4.4. Which means the ONE 4 vote is counting 96% and the SIX 10 votes count 4%.
That's messed up on any level. Once again, short film votes really SHOULD NOT be visible to the public unless there are at minimum 50 votes. The formula IMDb has for "keeping it real" for films doesn't work for short films with a limited reach. With the people out there not really watching the films and searching a high ranked film to give it a low score to boost their own numbers - they are being rewarded, while the filmmaker gets a beating. Again, simple solution, please just disable public view of ratings until there are enough votes for the formula to work correctly. Thank you.
Photo of Adam Watson

Adam Watson

  • 20 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
1.You don't know that 2. So you're saying that it should just be ignored? That's basically implying that the system doesn't need fixing, you want an example, there you go. Just the other day I saw a trailer for a movie coming soon called Coffee Town. But I saw it had a 4.2 rating so I was about to write it off in my mind... until I remembered the score bombers. The movie has some well known names, looks funny, hasn't been shown beyond a few preview screenings, and has a single "1" score from a top 1000 voter. It was score bombed, my suspicions confirmed. But I only thought to check because of my own experience with this flawed system.

You again speak of people getting in to the top 250 by getting their friends to upvote it, again I remind you that IMDB doesn't put low vote movies in the top 250 so don't fret about that. friends and other people emotionally invested in the film and the people that made it will vote 10s and there's nothing to be done about that, it's offensive that you would look down your nose at it escpecially since such people's votes apparently count for very little. but that doesn't make it okay for a single troll vote to bring the rating down to a 2. I don't know if hiding the votes below 50 is the right idea but showing nothing for a time is better than opening it up for score bombing and then showing a poor score as a result of a single troll vote. Yes with more votes it'll level out to an appropriate rating, but let it start high, and go down to the right level instead of starting low and struggling to raise to an appropriate rating. One person's vote shouldn't count for more than 10% of a rating no matter how many votes there are.

By the way I'm mostly happy with the scores for my own films right now. Realistic ratings, score bombers purged. But I subscribe to this thread to keep tabs on the situation and it kills me that IMDB hasn't done anything to remedy the situation other than delete troll votes only of people who complain here. Can you admit that the system is flawed and needs to be improved somehow? Don't minimize it, and don't blame it on the filmmakers.
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
You have to remember that the first 5 votes are hidden on ALL films. The fact that the first 5 votes are hidden doesn't preclude people from voting until the votes are visible, hiding the votes on short films until they reach a tipping point (50 or so votes) where they can withstand score bombing - or absorb the few people who don't like it, is not only reasonable and fair, but it's easy to do.

I don't know what job you do, but if on your raise evaluation your boss took 7 reviews and you had 6 glowing customer reviews and 1 unfavorable review and your boss decided that he was going to base 96% of the score he gave you for your raise on the 1 bad review - I doubt you'd be thrilled.

Short filmmakers do not want to stay short filmmakers. They love what they do, but they are building a body of work, a following so that they can gain ground to get backing to make a feature. This is a business for us. I am fine with someone not liking the film (if they've actually seen it). I'm not ok with that ONE vote counting for 96% of the score. Any way you slice it, it's unfair to the filmmaker.

Again, the easy fix is to hide the scores on short films until a higher number of votes is reached.

My daughter's films play a huge number of festivals. One of her films played 65 venues and aired on cable TV twice - won two Telly Awards - still has less than 30 votes. So it's NOT that the films aren't getting an audience. People just don't rush to IMDb to vote on short films like they do features. Unless you are a filmmaker you really can't know what we go through. In my case, my teenage daughter is the filmmaker and she's looking for scholarship interest for film school.

Bluesman, don't know where you live, but OperHator is playing in FL this weekend at a huge festival. If you want to catch a showing, follow the film on Facebook. :)
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
Wrong coast, but good to know. Thanks. Good luck getting more votes, too!
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
Have you or your daughter considered using "withoutabox?" Many IMDb regulars thirst for smaller, indie, shorts, and lesser known films and it's linked on every page of IMDb (in the links at the bottom) and any users watching are more likely to rate right away.
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
We use it all the time. :)
Photo of Scott

Scott

  • 11 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The bigger question is, why are all these top 1000 voters only giving 1's? Is that not vote stuffing in the same sense as your friend giving your film a 10? I mean i would like to see one post where someone has a top 1000 voter who has given their film anything greater than a 1.

System is flawed. You don't have to be that smart to figure that one out.
Photo of FrontPorchFilms

FrontPorchFilms

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Blues I don't think Adam thinks non filmmakers are stupid - I think he's frustrated and as a parent of a filmmaker I understand where his thoughts are. I can appreciate the job firemen do, but I can totally know what all they go through because I am not a fireman nor do I know any on a very personal basis.

You do keep stressing the one or two low votes which count so much shouldn't matter much, but what we're trying to say is that unless you walk in our shoes you really have no idea how much a messed up weighted system does affect us.

There is a solution to every problem and all we're asking for is a solution to this one.
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
I appreciate that. Thanks for the comment. I have faith they'll fix this and threads like these have offered some ideas...yet the wheels turn slooowwlly at IMDb sometimes!
Photo of Believe Again

Believe Again

  • 15 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Scott, the friends saw the movie but I bet bomber doesn't see movies, that's the difference and problem. Top 100 voter is doing this as business. To keep top 1000, the bomber needs to keep bombing. also bomber makes it easyer to make their client higher score.
Photo of Believe Again

Believe Again

  • 15 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
We've got more bombs after I wrote this. funny!
Photo of Believe Again

Believe Again

  • 15 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
P.S. I don't think my friend put 10 because I know it can be improved. I've never asked others to put 10 or good rate.
But anyway, I think people who got frustration would have to ask others to vote to clear the bad reputation. I guess the voters would be mostly related people or bombers. The bombers, who attacked many films...especially top100 voters age 18-29, messes not only the system but also film makers behavior up...
I understand well that this kind of rating system doesn't have practical meaning AT ALL. No meaning. I want imdb to delete all the rating no matter good or bad, because it's meaningless.
Before you try to clear the score up, we can go public with this rigged rating system and let people know that it's ridiculous to believe rigged rating system.
Photo of Victoria Masina

Victoria Masina

  • 36 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
OMG and ROTFL - because that's all that's left to do for me now - I contacted the help desk (my film hasn't been released yet but it got a bunch of non US voters that voted a 1) and asked them politely to remove the bogus votes, and even suggested they may take off all the 10 votes if they wanna or whatever, I don't care - but they said "no, the system is fair" - so I complain and call BS, and tell them this is slander and hurts the marketing of my movie (which, I repeat, isn't even out yet) and they hit me with a Top 1000, then I complain here and I get ANOTHER Top 1000 vote bomb!!! I just saw it today. My movie is down to a 3.3 with a true average of 7.8 even with all the BS votes!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1670991/

So how about this: We HAVE to fight back. Let's all go vote like crazy till we're all Top 1000 voters and then let's boost each other!!! :)
Photo of Believe Again

Believe Again

  • 15 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Looks same, though mine is worse 7.8 -> 1.5
we got score 1 from 6 people, 4 votes are from NON-US user. of course from top100 voter too.
Our film was not released out of the U.S. yet (only in the US) but got vote from NON-US users.

> "no, the system is fair"

What is fair!? The system is a nut.

> I complain here and I get ANOTHER Top 1000 vote bomb!!!

so sorry to hear that.
The perpetrator is checking here and gaming obviously. maybe the same person.

My film went to the film festival, I met many film makers. I noticed they also got bombs, nevertheless the films were very good.
The other day a film maker sent me a resume. I saw her imdb page and I noticed she also got top 1000 vote bomb. I felt her sympathy.
There are SO MANY victims.

I saw a bbs that many audience are talking that IMDB star is not useful at all now a days.
Not only film makers but also some audience notice it's juggled.
We should spread the word that imdb score is no meaning, juggled and so many independent film maker is attacked.
Then distributors or audince will think star has no meaning at all. IMDB has to reconsider this rediculous system.
Photo of Believe Again

Believe Again

  • 15 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hey, I got ANOTHER Top 1000 vote bomb too! must be same person!
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Folks should remember to +1 this if they have a problem, as it gains more prominence and the system allows staff to target the biggest problems.

Also it'd be worth +1ing this (not it isn't me who started the thread):

https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...
Photo of Victoria Masina

Victoria Masina

  • 36 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
I always +1 when I log in to this thread :) I also +1 for Emperor's link above ;)

Anyway, I think it's the same people - the group of non US users and the top 1000 voters - who bring down the scores. Another of our fellow victims, Noriko M Kambara, hooked up with me on LinkedIn to find some way of collaboration to fight this. I'll copy and paste what I wrote back to her in regards to IMDB, so that we can think-tank and come up with possible solutions:

"Their little worker bees start feeling like little gods. I wonder how we could contact the CEO or some other vital figure of the company and tell them their voting system backfired and is being abused. I am fairly certain that the score bombing has to do with IMDB personel. Eventually enough of us victims will get together and our voice will be big enough to be heard - and that will be bad enough for IMDB I hope that they'll have to change. Meanwhile I'll vote a 10 on your film and you can do the same for mine. I also started a thread on my films message board to alert visitors to the page about what happened. I urge them to take a look at the actual breakdown of the votes. You could start a thread like that in your film's message board. I'll reply to it to validate the situation, you could do the same on my thread :)"

Here's my thread on my film's IMDB page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1670991/b...

Please comment to help make people aware of it. Post a thread like that on yours and link here, so I can comment. Connect with me on FB, but let me know here first, since I don't accept request from random people anymore (weirdos, lol). Then I'll create an FB score bombing support group for all of us to get organized!

https://www.facebook.com/victoria.masina

And this is to you, little a-hole spy (it's no coincidence some of us suddenly got even worse score-bombed after we posted here): You are a bully. A cowardly one, hiding behind your computer. I don't like bullies. It's on!
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
The CEO is registered on this site/forum, https://getsatisfaction.com/people/co... and since he's pretty hands-on with the site and forums, it's likely he checks in, now and then. Or he can be contacted via the Help Desk contact form http://www.imdb.com/helpdesk/contact_... (note that it currently has about a 1,000 message backlog and might take a while for response.
Photo of Victoria Masina

Victoria Masina

  • 36 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Thank you for the info. The backlog sounds discouraging, lol... By the time he gets it I'll be 86 and don't give a crap anymore about the rating, or I forgot I had that movie. Hehe...

You know, the thing that makes this voting system so unfair is that the few very high votes (obviously from the peeps involved) are from the proud mamas and papas of said movies. Those very low budget little films - you can't compare it with the big production companies and their promotional prowess and advertising capacity etc. A score bomb is a death sentence and not a fair measure to even out the score. A top 1000 voter counts like a million votes - the little films will never be able to receive enough positive votes to make it fair. The same voting system that's been used on the big budget movies with tens of thousands of votes cannot be used on our little movies with not even one percent of the number of votes. :(
Photo of bluesmanSF

bluesmanSF, Champion

  • 10815 Posts
  • 6429 Reply Likes
Well, with many millions of users, 1K is relatively low..hehe.

You're welcome.

Yes, with the small films, there are likely a few family/friends in there, but really, this happens with all films. A new, say, Batman film will likely have a lot of Batman fans voting furiously at the outset and ranking will drop over time. So, I guess that's what the system, partly, is adjusting for. But still...there are a lot of pretty bad examples of how bad the system is for these smallish films. Getting a lot more votes is always helpful and many of these film makers are trying hard to do that.

You're welcome for the info.
Photo of Victoria Masina

Victoria Masina

  • 36 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Sure it happens with all films, but bombing the big ones doesn't have the same impact as bombing the small ones. Drop of water on a hot stone vs. drop of water on a helpless baby spider. Poor lil spider :/ Because the big movies ALSO have Top 1000 voters that vote fair, and not only the troll votes that we get.
Photo of Victoria Masina

Victoria Masina

  • 36 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
i.e. Batman Begins had 889 Top 1000 votes with an average score of 7.8 - I sure wouldn't mind that, lol

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.