RYM / Sonemic General
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
Anyone else in the mood for some /rym/?
>>65684347
Good OP image
>>65684365
i chuckled desu
>>65684347
>RYM / Sonemic General
Even the site creators aren't calling it sonemic yet, why are we?
https://rateyourmusic.com/~vApOrzfuok
>>65684347
heheh
>>65684347
Vision of a future where you can reprogram your sight to make people as beautiful as their rating curves.
>>65684604
Holy embyro
>>65684347
I don't come to these threads at all but this is an amazing OP
>>65684660
i kno
>>65684692
one year of high school english class should require more reading than that
do you live in the ghetto?
MEN LIE, WOMEN LIE, STATS DON'T LIE
>>65684769
Unless you're a fakerater. tankpit, TheHorbgorbler, Entracte7, the list goes on and on...
>>65684800
horbgorbler is not a fake rater, she is a masturbator
https://rateyourmusic.com/~herb_guy
hellooo
>>65684840
so much wrong with this post i don't know where to begin. which forumposting nu-male are you?
>>65684840
>she
>>65684347
>that image
heheh
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Prismadoll
>>65684851
Yikes...
>>65684858
suck my dick u bitch
>>65684881
Why do you like bad music? Why not good music? I recommend you give good music a chance. Just for a change.
>>65684851
You rated Aquarium by Aqua higher than
>Rubber Soul
>Homogenic
>Master of Reality
>Hunky Dory
>Disintegration
>Kind of Blue
>Cosmogramma
>Donuts
>Unknown Pleasures
>In the Court of the Crimson King
>Red
>The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady
>The College Dropout
>My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
why
>>65684953
>Rubber Soul
Bad
>Homogenic
Very bad
>Master of Reality
Bad
>Hunky Dory
Bad
>Disintegration
Bad
>Kind of Blue
Good
>Cosmogramma
Very bad
>Donuts
Bad
>Unknown Pleasures
Good
>In the Court of the Crimson King
Good
>Red
Good
>The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady
Good
>The College Dropout
Bad
>My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
Bad
>>65684953
Aquarium is better than The College Dropout and MBDTF. The rest, I'm not so sure.
>>65684953
Is it so hard to believe that someone could rate a well crafted, vocal-centric, electronic dance album higher than those so-called classics?
>Only an occasional lurker of RYM threads
>The attention whores who post their profiles in every thread are all baddies with under 600 ratings
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Ewert
>>65685039
No, but if you like that sort of thing more than Kind of Blue, for example, you are objectively a soulless hedonist.
>>65684937
Why do you post bad memes. Why not good memes? Or talk about music instead of belittling people? I recommend you give it a chance. Just for a change.
>>65685039
actually you're right, I'm being stupidly closed-minded. should I try it out?
>>65685041
It's because they have no cred to preserve.
https://rateyourmusic.com/~NoveltyCondom
i think i stopped enjoying music as soon as i got rym
tear me apart gang
>>65685090
It can never hurt to broaden your horizons imo.
>>65685120
I think you're lost... /daily/ is that way ---->
>>65684840
Worst thing I've ever heard about masturbation.
https://rateyourmusic.com/~MrRoboto66
what did he mean by this
>>65685077
Kind of Blue is one of the most boring things created by human beings and I love jazz
>>65684998
Someone likes scaruffi
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Montie_Ray
Im
Never
In
The
Mood
>>65685175
>and I love jazz
No you don't
>>65684411
they call it sonemic in emails and in many other places.
>>65684883
what's bothering you anon
>>65684953
3.0 means i still like it
but a lot of these have obvious flaws
>>65685200
>modalcuck detected
>>65685194
Yo fäm if u like fleet foxes please check this out
https://youtu.be/kmk2EnwRbDE
>>65684347
>Keira Knightley
mildlytriggered.sh
What do I do for my 300th image /rym/?
>>65685377
Add some Vipper release that isn't on RYM
>>65685175
>I am musically illiterate
>I do not understand improvisation
>I do not understand chord structure
>Yeah I love jazz!! Sun Ra, Cecil Taylor, John Zorn, Peter Brotzmann... the list just goes on and on... CRAZY wacky shit man \m/ Got any stuff where they blow on the saxophones like really hard? xD *scrolls through /daily/*
>What do you mean I don't understand jazz? I just listen to how it sounds, just like all other music. All music should be listened to the same way as pop/rock music, right guise?
>>65685377
Kill yourself
>>65685466
You do realize that there are people like Barry Harris who don't like any modal jazz, right?
>>65685466
Sun Ra is the only one of those guys I've listen to lmao
I'm mostly into trad and bebop
>>65685496
How is that relevant? It's impossible to justify thinking Kind of Blue is "boring." That doesn't have to do with liking it or not.
>>65685082
d a m n
a
m
n
https://rateyourmusic.com/~ElectricLizard
zzzzzzzz
In slightly-avant news The Gerogerigegege long lost album Piano River leaked recently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSSGi0Or9yk
>>65685420
done. What a great milestone.
>>65685492
lol no
>>65685594
I require more anime girls with corpse paint
https://rateyourmusic.com/~Tyrant_flycatcher
Hey people. Listening to a Billy Joel has left me in need for more music feels.
Any recs?
>>65685594
>12 reviews in less than a week
Scary.
Also this >>65685654
>>65685377
Complete some obscure kvlt band's page.
>>65685654
LEAGUE OF LEGENDS IS NOT ANIME REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
and maybe
>>65685720
I mean I'm not putting any effort into them lmao. I'm just putting muh thoughts down, that's all.
![quote-one-can-never-read-too-little-of-bad-or-too-much-of-good-books-bad-books-are-intellectual-arthur-schopenhauer-41-34-55[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/te6lptg.jpg "quote-one-can-never-read-too-little-of-bad-or-too-much-of-good-books-bad-books-are-intellectual-arthur-schopenhauer-41-34-55[1].jpg")
>>65684347
Gentle reminder: if you hold a mediocre-to-negative opinion of more than half the music you've listened to, you're intentionally listening to music you don't like in order to tell other people that you don't like it. In other words, you're not only a pseud, but you're also a stupider person because you've consumed so much intellectual poison (deliberately, I add). A person who listens to nothing but four/fives is infinitely superior to a person who listens to mostly 3.5/5s and downward
>>65684953
The actual answer is because Scaruffi told him to
>>65685847
3.5s are excellent, it's the 3.0s that don't mean anything.
>>65685847
what do you think about the new ferraro, boldfaure?
>>65685847
That doesn't make sense, does it?
How will I know if I'll like it if I haven't listened to it? Even if it's a genre I generally enjoy that doesn't mean I'll instantly love everything I hear.
It depends on preferences and how picky you are, nothing more.
>>65685847
>I don't understand scaling
>I don't understand what a "curve" implies
>I do not understand relative judgement
>I attach arbitrary feelings to each number and set 2.5 as the middle "feeling," meaning I have to dislike an album to give it a mediocre rating
>My feelings at the time of hearing an album are a better scale than judging an album's importance to me relative to all other albums I have listened to
>You must scale your ratings the same way as me
>>65684881
Whats the cat from, its cute
>>65685193
Many of the ones he said were bad were liked or even praised by Scaruffi
>>65685169
Silence
We have no use for your crippled prophet Anti-warhol
People who rate albums independently of each other based solely on enjoyment ARE NOT RATING ON A CURVE.
Think about what it means when your teacher says "The test will be graded on a curve."
It means EVEN IF YOU DO PRETTY GOOD, YOU CAN GET A SHIT SCORE IF EVERYONE ELSE DOES BETTER.
This is fucking basic shit, yet people still don't understand it.
And if you don't rate on a curve, your "curve" should look pretty fucking random, because all it's based on is your emotional temperament and what you randomly feel compelled to download.
>>65684766
i only rate things as i've read them i don't go back and rate books i've already read, duh. it would be unfair and inaccurate.
>>65685952
It's a webcomic, and it's not a cat. It's a snake.
I don't know the name, though. Sorry anon.
>>65686050
who gives le fuck
>>65686050
I've studied enough about statistics and experimental design to tell you that that's wrong.
>>65686050
So there should be a liberty Bell looking "curve" then?
I miss arcadia bros
>>65686112
t. arcadia
>>65686099
You must be boldfaure because you're appealing to your own apparent knowledge rather than actually fucking showing it or posting anything of substance.
In other words: Not an argument.
>>65686104
If that's what you decide to scale things to...
>>65686112
tfw these threads will never be restored to the glory days of Arcadia shitposting
https://rateyourmusic.com/~hladik
>>65686190
Him getting BTFO was probably the greatest thing to ever happen in these threads though
>>65685923
>How will I know if I'll like it if I haven't listened to it?
By looking at the album cover, you fucking embryo. Only experienced RYM users can detect a good album based solely on how edgy the cover looks.
>>65686196
>5.0 to Salon de Sachiko
My man
>>65686190
Literally all he did was spam three memes he didn't even invent. I'm pretty sick of people pretending he was even slightly worthwhile. I have no regrets about destroying him.
>>65686230
Who was behind the BTFOing tho? I bet it was boldfaure
>>65686050
>>65685847
both of these make sense
>>65686099
yet you can't come up with a single argument
>>65686234
t. embryo
>>65686257
it was me, not even lying. i rarely post my username in these threads (which i said to arcadia while arguing with him before. i argued with him a couple times prior to the final BTFOing)
http://rateyourmusic.com/~underr
Please refer to my "other comments", specifically to the first line. Thanks.
>>65686196
why'd you make another account, tankpit?
Virgins on RYM list when?
>>65686424
And the award for "Most Retarded Rating Scale" goes tooooo...
>>65686424
how many times have you changed your rating system? at least 10+ right?
current one's the most pragmatic
>>65686501
>current one's the most pragmatic
lol kill yourself
>>65686501
I think 10 is a small number
~50 maybe
>>65686539
I've tried no ratings a few times but the auto recommendations are valuable at times. I hope the custom sonemic rating options allow for completely useless ratings but also recommendations
>>65686569
Hope you're right
I tried it on Glitchwave and I don't know why someone would use 100 rating scales
Like what's the difference between a 9.6 album and a 9.7 one?
>>65686712
>Hey can you please explain how "Stupid Hoe' is a perfect song? im just curious
lmaaooooo
>>65686424
why don't you like bach.
>>65686811
I love Bach.
any other le knight man in
>>65686830
your 2.0 says Johann Sebastian Bach. i'm assuming 2.0 is the stuff you dislike.
>>65686858
It's just a prank bro
>>65686873
so you're an ebin ruseman
>>65686307
so you're Alsaav
>>65687002
yes
>>65686651
why can't I find this picture in the archive?
Does anyone have a link to AntiWarhol's Goodreads profile?
>>65687156
It was deleted before it was archived
>>65687179
>not having his usernames memorized
anxietytango
>>65685952
She's a bush viper named Lilac. Webcomic's called Scalie Schoolie. The writing's pretty charming and the art style is adorable.
http://shenanimation.tumblr.com/tagged/sscomic/chrono
http://www.7cups.com/@Anxietytango
What did AW mean by this?
WOULD YOU RATHER:
>1. Have AntiWarhol PM you and say he wants to add you on slsk, then he invites you to kg and becomes your friend
OR
>2. Get to fuck a cute Japanese girl of your choice two times
?
>>65687311
Two
Stop making bad memes
>>65687340
fag
>>65687249
>Wonderful, truly empathetic and understanding listener.
>>65687311
both of these options are awful
>>65687372
fag
>>65687311
>Hitomi Tanaka exists
2
>>65687311
Get to fuck AntiWarhol two times
>>65687311
if he lets me download any of his music from him then 1
>>65686050
grading isnt the same as scoring idiot
>>65685847
if you listen to a wide array of music and are always trying new things you have never come across then of course theres going to be a lot of mediocre stuff
>>65687399
that's some shitty normie taste you've got there bro
you probably wank to lisa ann too
>>65687510
Reported
>>65687543
reported for what?
>>65687510
>grading isnt the same as scoring idiot
explain
>>65687552
>This is a private beta. You're free to discuss and give your general impressions of it in public, but do not post screenshots of the beta in public places (not all of the design is final yet, and we want the look of the site to remain a surprise for people who are not part of the beta), do not share information from the beta testers forum and do not attempt to provide access to the beta to other users (e.g. by sharing your account login details). We reserve the right to revoke beta testing privileges of any user accounts that we feel are being used to violate the above rules.
>>65687368
The only reason he's stoic and ironic on RYM is because he knows anything he says will become meme material on 4chan. See how he wasn't like that in 2009/2010 back when he wasn't an e-celeb yet and was friendly to a lot of people on RYM. His attitude in real life or even in other sites where he's not constantly being stalked might be completely different.
>>65687311
I'd rather not be friends with an avant-teen, so 2.
>>65687587
he was MUCH more negative/hostile/bully-like before he was meme'd here. he got banned for last.fm for harassing people twice. he's only ever been nice to his Disciples
>>65687587
Wasn't he mean to people on last.fm tho?
>>65687570
scoring is objective, when you grade on a curve though you are deciding which scores go into which grade category. e.g. if the exam was easy then maybe a lot of people got around 65/80, so you put that the C grade at 60-70 even though its meant to be a halfway point. you don't just take score off because someone else did better.
>>65687584
oh i thought you meant reported on here
>>65687629
Feelings about an album = Score.
Ratings for the album = Grade.
Retard.
>>65687202
>Elliot Rodger's manifesto
>four stars
wdhmbt?
>>65687664
what are his favorite books? i can't look because i don't have goodreads
>>65687658
no you are probably retarded
ratings are obviously a score.
you grade by putting in the text descriptors on your ratings, so if you have a positive skew then maybe you would put average at 2.0 even though 2.75 is the halfway point in terms of score.
>>65687685
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/4668262-rich
>>65687629
you don't care about being banned from GW?
>>65687696
That is essentially just changing the default numerical scale RYM gives you. That's the equivalent of a teacher handing out inflated grades, but calling a B+ "average." What teachers do instead is scale (standardize) the raw scores before assigning grades to them.
>>65687760
i am banned
>>65687765
no you do not understand
you dont change the raw numerical values, you keep them objective
grading is a way to assign the meaning to the numerical values, so if there is a positive skew in ratings you call a 2/5 average and if theres a positive skew in exam scores you call a 40% a C
2/5 is a numerical value not a grade
>>65687623
who did he harass? i only know about exitsense (the joys of the joys), but tbf he used to be a pretty creepy drone back then
>>65687813
insomniacme (~dart/flw_ on rym), i think
>>65687809
Letter grades have literally no meaning.
Raw score ---> Standardized score ---> Final score & GPA
GPA is called GRADE point average because it is a grade.
>>65687944
letter grades are actually the only score with meaning beyond secondary school. plenty of professors don't standardize scores and rather adopt a method like >>65687809
>>65687992
GPA is the only score with meaning beyond secondary school, you fucktard. Letter grades are for elementary school. You literally have it backwards. I doubt you've gone to college.
>>65687944
they do have meaning because they show you where you are relative to other people and theres also mutual intelligibility on things like a C being good and an A being the best, i have never recieved a standardized score in my life
>>65688045
gpa is derived from letter grades, what are you on about?
>>65688060
No. Standard score is literally making the raw score relative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_score
You have never received a standardized score because you've never gone to college, then.
>>65688063
Other way around.
Letter grades are qualitative while GPA is quantitative. Qualitative data groups together ranges of values and labels them. Quantitative data is exact. You cannot argue this.
>>65687846
well if what AW said about dart is true (that he mass rated 500 things a day to look ~avant~) then fuck him
maybe exitsense didn't deserve the BTFO, but dart did
>>65688142
i am not american, most of the world does not use standardized scores very often because grades are more useful and more intelligible
>>65688142
>Qualitative data groups together ranges of values and labels them
>Letter grades are qualitative
do you disagree that the 10 possible ratings on RYM group ranges of values and label them?
>>65688142
Letter grade of B --> GPA of 3.0 for the class
your professor may consider 60-75 a B or 80-89 a B. the score doesn't matter, only the letter grade.
>>65684766
there should be more than 7 books in a school year? dude. high schoolers wouldn't have time to analyze them properly
>>65688218
Yes, because your "feelings" about an album cannot translate to Pitchfork-tier specific numbers. They can only be approximate. On a 100 point scale, it's reasonable that only 10 point differences are perceptible.
>>65688239
GPA is calculated by setting a numerical average (say, 2.6) that correlates with percent (say, 70%). Letter grades are literally not necessary unless you're getting a report card to show your parents.
>>65684953
even mediocre dance pop is honestly better than The Cure
>>65688326
both universities I've attended only used letter grades to calculate gpa, but professors could determine which raw scores correlated to which letter grades. I've never heard of anyone using what you propose.
>>65685847
yep fuckin word. why listen to something you know you won't dig? my really negative ratings are usually things i've been subjected to inadvertently
>>65688326
your feelings are the raw numbers. 5/5 means you basically have nothing you dislike about it whereas 2.5/5 means you disliked a little more than you liked.
it doesn't make sense to put albums you disliked mostly in 3/5 just so you're "rating on a curve" when you can grade by adding a description.
https://rateyourmusic.com/~a_e_i_o_u
rate/diss/add/whatever
:)
>>65688365
My university uses percentage and allows professors to set an average GPA.
>>65688388
See >>65686050
If you are directly assigning feelings to each number, you are not rating on a curve.
You can "grade" them like giving letter grades, obviously, but it will not be curved.
>>65688388
i mean the site features even show that this is intended usage, if you put an album you mostly disliked in 3/5 to be on a curve then it would cause you to get notified of future releases by an artist you don't like and that album would effect your auto recs
>>65688438
but you use grades to quantify it in terms of a normal distribution, that is the point of having descriptors on your ratings
wdhmbt?
http://rateyourmusic.com/~Rodrigo2703
>>65688444
On a curved scale, literally all 3/5 says is how well the album did RELATIVE to other albums. If your curve is centered, it simply means that albums is above average.
>>65688474
Adding rating descriptors is totally optional and can be set to the names of pornstars or anime characters for a reason. It doesn't fucking matter.
>>65688525
thats not intended use, its meant to be an objective scale qualified by descriptors, and pornstar names are grading because the person putting the pornstar names is doing it to let you know which sections are average, which are above and which are below. if you were meant to use relative ratings then a 3/5 wouldn't activate all those features like recs and upcoming releases.
standardising scores is not common practice in most of the world, grading is.
>>65684347
yo these threads are autistic af but I saw this image in the catalog and it gave me a good kek
fair play
>>65688613
>the person putting the pornstar names is doing it to let you know which sections are average
How are you supposed to know what's "average" unless
>A. It literally says "average."
or
>B. It's curved and the numbers speak for themselves: the center is the mean is average.
>a 3/5 wouldn't activate all those features like recs and upcoming releases.
What are you even talking about?
>standardising scores is not common practice in most of the world, grading is.
Not an argument.
Pic related is an example of how my university grades, by the way. There were not exactly 500 total points in the class, obviously. It's normalized/standardized to those points.
Guess the song.
>>65688728
do you not understand what mutual intelligibility is?
>What are you even talking about?
im talking about giving a release a 3/5 on rateyourmusic.com and how it causes you to get notified about future releases from the same artist. why would they do this if youre meant to rank albums with a relative system? because if you did that you dont necessarily even like a 3/5
side A is quite interesting but side B is a mess
>>65687399
She's so gross wtf
>>65688794
>do you not understand what mutual intelligibility is?
Again, what are you even talking about?
>it causes you to get notified about future releases from the same artist.
Are you talking about the "upcoming releases" module?
And like I said, 3/5 on a curved scale means it's better than most music you've heard.
>>65688833
fag
>>65688892
>Again, what are you even talking about?
do you need me to talk to you like you're a retard or something?
if u put on a rating descriptor "superman 64" then every1 who looks at it sees it means "this rating is a bad rating its for games well below da average" whereas if your 3/5 rating says system shock 2, your 4 says deus ex and your 5 says planescape torment than you and everyone looking at it knows ur saying "these are all ratings that are not just a little bit more than da average, dey are all well above my average"
>And like I said, 3/5 on a curved scale means it's better than most music you've heard.
it doesnt mean you actually had a positive feeling towards it though
>>65688949
I don't even have anything against big boobs but she just looks kinda deformed
Could someone please redpill me on this release?
>>65689064
Rock Slope is a joke created by the mods. None of the releases from that group are real.
>>65689064
Sharifi uses the Rock Slope page to conduct various tests
>>65689000
Okay, BAYAR, I hate to reminds you, but your "writing style" is so unintelligible and fucking retarded that you shouldn't expect people to make sense of every god awful message you shit out.
>then every1 who looks at it sees it means [...]
No, no they fucking don't.
>everyone looking at it knows
No. You cannot prove this, so why argue it?
>it doesnt mean you actually had a positive feeling towards it though
Irrelevant.
>>65689166
who the fuck is bayar?
>No, no they fucking don't.
>No. You cannot prove this, so why argue it?
yes they fucking do you idiot, you are autistic if you think we can't communicate based off of mutual intelligibility when that is HOW COMMUNICATION WORKS you fucking inbred. granted, there are some people in the world (very few who are savvy enough to find rym) who don't know that superman 64 is a legendarily bad game, but if they don't understand then they can ask any of the massive amount of people who do. there's also people like you in the world who don't understand basic english words such as 'intelligibility' but that doesn't mean we throw them out the window.
>>65689277
What the absolute fuck? I have never heard of Superman 64. Assuming everyone likes video games is extremely autistic.
If your ratings are spewed all over the scale randomly and only explained through the descriptors WHICH HAVE NO EFFECT ON ANYTHING, then overall ratings, recommendations, charts, etc, would be broken. I seriously don't know where you're going with this.
>>65689347
>I have never heard of Superman 64
and yet with five seconds of googling you can understand what is conveyed by the descriptor, and most people would already understand.
>If your ratings are spewed all over the scale randomly and only explained through the descriptors WHICH HAVE NO EFFECT ON ANYTHING, then overall ratings, recommendations, charts, etc, would be broken.
no they wouldn't lol
an average of 3 would mean 'on average people liked this more than they disliked it' with my system whereas using your system an average of 3 has no meaning, it just means 'when compared to the other albums that the rymers who happened to rate this also happened to rate it is in the top 50%', which tells us nothing about the quality
>>65689347
and why are you bragging about having to look up a basic word?
>>65689417
You are making someone of the most broken arguments I've ever seen.
Even if the video game example YOU CAME UP WITH works that way, pornstars based on some guy's preference are not communicable. They have no meaning other than to the person who ranked them. Similarly, food, hobbies, sports... attaching tons other things you like or dislike to your ratings can have pretty much no meaning to people other than yourself.
>an average of 3 would mean 'on average people liked this more than they disliked it' with my system
So you're saying everyone's system has to say that "3" means "like?" What if you want to grade 3 as "hate?" What if your descriptor for 3 actually says Superman 64? Who's to say you can't do that?
>which tells us nothing about the quality
Yes it does. It tells us the album is above average in quality. Are you actually retarded?
>>65689442
I'm showing that I didn't misuse the word. Calling a post "unintelligible" is correct usage.
>>65689534
*some of
>>65689534
>What if you want to grade 3 as "hate?" What if your descriptor for 3 actually says Superman 64? Who's to say you can't do that?
i already addressed this point retardó, the site is not designed to be used that way since it factors 3/5s into your recs and tells you about upcoming releases. why are you making arguments that we both know are stupid?
>Yes it does. It tells us the album is above average in quality. Are you actually retarded?
it really fucking doesnt you idiot, unless everyone who rates it has heard every other album ever made then it does not tell us anything about quality when you use a relative system. use a quality-based system to tell us about quality.
>I'm showing that I didn't misuse the word. Calling a post "unintelligible" is correct usage.
i was talking about when you got stumped by the phrase "mutual intelligibility"
>>65689635
>the site is not designed to be used that way since it factors 3/5s into your recs and tells you about upcoming releases
I told you this reasoning makes no fucking sense. Why does the functionality of the "upcoming releases" module mean a universal standard for your feelings has been assigned to certain ratings? I already said that the functionality of that module can be explained by 3/5 meaning "above average." It makes sense to be notified of releases by artists who have made work you ranked above most other work you've heard. You should want to hear more "above average" work.
>use a quality-based system to tell us about quality.
Relative quality is still quality you fucking idiot. It tells you that generally, people think the album is better than most other albums.
Your ENTIRE argument hedges on the fact (which I'm not even sure is true) that upcoming releases pop up for albums you rate 3 stars. Sharifi could've programmed this to simply cull out releases that you think are total shit. He could think 3 is average and you should see releases by average artists. He could just be hiding releases that he thinks you must think are total dogshit, and showing you everything else. You do not know this. The only way to STANDARDIZE what scores mean is to base them on numbers alone, not arbitrary feelings.
Bringing up mutual intelligibility was and still is irrelevant.
>>65689858
no because "above average" does not translate to "i like this", a 3/5 on an autistic relative scale can mean you gave a positive score to an album you have an overall negative feeling towards
"Relative quality is still quality you fucking idiot"
no its not, it tells you nothing about the quality you mong because its completely dependent on how good the other albums they've heard are. take an extreme case where a person has only found 1 album they actually like and have heard many others but don't like them (maybe they're more interested in film or videogames and dont like music particularly), do you think they have to give the albums they disliked the least 4.5/5s? thats fucking stupid.
>Your ENTIRE argument hedges on the fact (which I'm not even sure is true) that upcoming releases pop up for albums you rate 3 stars.
it absolutely is true and my argument doesnt hinge on it but its a quick and easy way to explain why it makes no sense to give albums you have a negative feeling towards a 3
>The only way to STANDARDIZE what scores mean is to base them on numbers alone, not arbitrary feelings
and i already btfod you about trying to standardise by rating against a curve about a million times by now, good night
>>65690064
Reasoning like this would tell you that saying "Best ever" means nothing. No, saying "best ever" would imply that something is very good. Similarly, "average" says that something is of "so-so" quality.
> do you think they have to give the albums they disliked the least 4.5/5s?
Yes.
RYM is simply a tool to sort out the music you've heard.
Sorting things relatively shows you everything you need to know. Otherwise you end up with a random arbitrary clusterfuck.
You seem to think pooling together and averaging many ratings of people sorting things relative to their own experience is somehow not valid, while doing the same thing with the *feelings* of people of completely varying temperament somehow is. Like I said originally, if you do not curve your ratings, your distribution should look pretty random, especially from person to person. On RYM, people (thankfully) have the urge to curve their ratings in some way to the best of their abilities, and you see things *somewhat* standardizing around the center of the scale.
>>65690262
hey so you know a lot about stuff, right?
how's my rym?
https://rateyourmusic.com/~a_e_i_o_u
>>65690287
Looks like a typical embryo to me.
>>65689858
>>65690064
This is literal autism. Please turn off your computers and think about your life and purpose for a few minutes.
>>65690326
umm what does that mean?
>>65690357
>umm
gb2tumblr you fucking embryo
>>65689002
Dude are you gay xD
>>65689002
Looks hot as fuck to me tb.h
>>65690552
never been there
i scrolled through all the posts arguing about rating systems. are they worth reading
>>65690745
no
>>65690745
nope
>>65690745
they never are.
![2d34631ec8881b0278f35092572535b2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ETSDkNO.jpg "2d34631ec8881b0278f35092572535b2[1].jpg")
https://rateyourmusic.com/~HUnewm
send me gothic recs and I will send you some back
or don't
I0000days 10/15 08:26 GMT
used to pretend that I'm a retard but now I understand why this is the best album of the decade I think
psychometry 04/15 01:19 GMT
i didnt know you could put videos on reviews
Pate 05/31 07:19 GMT
generic bland nipponese """avant-folk"""
nothing to see here
flyingwill 06/15 04:15 GMT
^ edgy!
>>65690745
>are they worth reading
Probably not. If you've read the FAQ, and know how weighting works (meaning if you don't have balanced ratings, you don't contribute to the scores), you should be okay.
>>65690943
kpop man is right, 0% is a tepid snoozefest. and i usually like that sort of thing
>>65690971
nice edges man
>>65690943
kill all kpop fags like the dogs they are
>>65690986
I0000days and treeqt are the worst
>>65690745
I skimmed it. Possibly the most boring shit I've ever glanced over.
>>65690943
it isn't even avant though
just pleasant and comfy music
i don't know how someone can dislike it
>>65691003
all of them are awful except maybe kishinev who mostly just keeps to himself
>>65691141
t. embryo
>>65691158
t. edge the hog
>>65691156
he writes annoying as fuck reviews and is a confirmed pedophile, but that aside, i dislike his tongue in cheek way of self-promotion on /mu/
>>65691179
kishinev isnt the one who posts his profile in these threads lol
>>65691231
lmao
>>65691222
t. Kishinev
>>65691179
all the avant-weebs are pedophiles really, and also i don't really think that's him self-promoting on here. maybe i'm wrong, idk
>>65691179
>>65691231
>>65691329
you dont get post irony
![tumblr_nk0y3hno8G1rq9djho1_400[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/3Zfz5Gi.jpg "tumblr_nk0y3hno8G1rq9djho1_400[1].jpg")
https://rateyourmusic.com/~BAYAR
make some room for the tastemaker
>>65691423
le ass es on FIREEEEE O_O
rawr *holds up spork* :3
is minako honda the GOAT idol?
>>65691605
The 80s were great and all, but anyone who thinks that 80's idols can trump the modern day alt idols is an idiot.
Now kanamiru. That's an idol.
>>65691605
minako honda could actually sing
not bad for a shitty city pop idol
>>65691423
K I L L
I
L
L
B A Y A R
A
Y
A
R
>>65692143
Hater comments on RYM this morning, probably from some mucore poser. This site is afraid of me. I have seen its true face. The RYM threads are extended gutters and the gutters are full of fake raters and when the real raters finally post their profiles, nobody cares. The accumulated filth of all their memes and curve discussions will foam up about their waists and all the plebs and NEETs will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll whisper "no."
>>65691423
>tfw based BAYAR will never trip on /mu/ again
>>65692227
FUN
NEH
>>65692219
lmao is that how bayar sounds? he's such a faggy goth
>>65692316
hi summer
>>65692059
bis are the best
wdsmbt
>>65692447
:^p
>>65692059
>anyone who thinks that 80's idols can trump the modern day alt idols is an idiot.
Hypersexual exploitation of little girls is cool I guess, if you're a pedophile.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/pressure-under-water.355869/
Alright guys who wants to help Sodr2 do his Math homework?
>>65692555
t. sodr2
Seriously though why would you bother googling sodr2's posts to other websites from 2009. He's no arcadia
>>65692600
Plot twist: it was Arcadia trying to BTFO based sodr2
>>65692600
Just bored I guess
http://tasbeha.org/community/discussion/9489/listening-to-the-quran
>>65692059
Who is this slut?
>>65692664
why is he so christian bros?
>>65692664
>is christian
>listening to quran recordings non-ironically nor post-ironically
Why is sodr2 so based?
>>65692664
holy shit
>>65692664
wow this is hilarious
>>65692697
Christians are objectively better human beings than non-christians
Why is sodr2 so based?
>>65692664
http://tasbeha.org/community/discussion/8874/is-downloading-music-a-sin
This is from 2010 and he's still based as fuck
Definitely beats arcadia
what does he listen to bros
>>65691003
Why does everyone throw shade at treeqt? He's done nothing remotely offensive
>>65692909
https://rateyourmusic.com/genre/Church+Music/
Why is Deagger so passive aggressive lads?
>>65692664
> i heard some of it on youtube and i was like "WOW, this is so beautiful" then you start doubting your faith. It is very dangerous and when you do this act you invite the devil into your house.
wdhmbt?
>>65692909
Nicki Minaj - Anaconda
On repeat
>>65692931
He is a notorious kfapper and shitposter who probably shitposts in these threads.
https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/mu/?task=search2&ghost=&search_text=&search_subject=&search_username=gummi&search_tripcode=&search_email=&search_filename=&search_datefrom=&search_dateto=&search_media_hash=&search_op=all&search_del=dontcare&search_int=dontcare&search_ord=new&search_capcode=all&search_res=post
>As much as I hate /mu/ and 4chan, at least that horrible and disgusting place is better than RYM's forum. RYM's forum has nothing good about it at all and all the users that post there often are nothing but obnoxious. I seriously hope sonemic sucks so I can just stop using this website and focus on my studies instead. I'm tired of being talked about when I say nothing to no one.
wdhmbt
What are some good Glitchwave users to drone?
sodr2, my wife has a friend that is muslim, I refuse to go to their house and told my wife she is not allowed in ours. The only reason I allow my wife over to their house is because she is her own person and will learn in time why I do what I do. This might be extreme but I cannot trust anyone who adheres to such a demonic religion, even if they dont know anything about it. I cannot trust them. It is a demonic religion. -Ioannes
July 2010
wdhmbt
>>65693022
is he? seems normal to me desu
