No. Just pointing out the massive flaw of saying it has 100% reviews on RT. The vast majority of people who cite RT only cite the critics, which again, have proven to be brainless sellouts.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

So you’re also implying that the “Audience” score on there is a measure of quality?

If you’re here to just say all sentiment metrics are bullshit, then, I guess good job spreading the depressing news. You’re saying to trust nothing and no one, especially in aggregate, about product reviews.

Individuals are shills, paid influencers, etc, and trying to aggregate to compensate for that is just bullshit, in your eyes.

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, it's not a measure of quality. Though it IS a more accurate measure of general audience reaction.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

My opinion is that the critics are talking about product quality, and that’s what pisses people off. Setting aside actual proven paid shills, of course. And that the audience score is about audience reaction, and not about the quality of the product.

People hate being told they like low quality content.

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

lol no. So many critics absolutely love crap with the lowest quality writing I've seen in decades. They do not review on quality unless it's subjective, "this movie was so pretty!" type BS.

What one person thinks of as 'quality' can be very diferent from another. Even if people are being as objective as possible (and again, critics are not), different people value different qualities differently.

[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The likelihood of any content being 100% is impossible.