"What are soccer penalties?" is an actual title that confused writers. Misleading or inaccurate titling can make rating a title group even trickier.

It is easier to judge marketplace articles because individual articles are given specifications that are displayed. Most articles do not do that. Helium's rating system is unguided by writing guidelines and an established rating method.

iv) Are some writers equipped to rate a topic in general and specifically?

Incompetence can sometimes be mistaken as unfairness. Some writers do not put enough effort or thought into rating. Many others just do not have the ability to judge other members' articles properly.

v) Is the rating comparison contributing to inconsistency?

Helium's rating comparison leaves a bit to be desired. How do we know whether one article is better "By far", "More", or "Slightly more"?. The reality is that these grades are more difficult to consistently apply to the same title group over time. What you choose can have an unintended impact on the title group. That is not the fault of raters, certainly!

vi) Judging what we do not know

Helium's rating algorithm is understandably kept a secret. If people knew how to influence rating, there would be some who would use it to improve their rating quality. Some would use that knowledge to manipulate the system. We have some idea of how the rating system works, but only at a conceptual level. The absence of information and understanding about the details of Helium's rating system only enables to judge the results, which are generally in a state of flux.

vii) Rerates

Title groups are automatically rerated for leapfrogs and new articles. Your article may have been sitting pretty on top for months and then it falls appreciably when new titles are entered or someone leapfrogs. You may have to wait patiently as your article slowly chugs it way up along the ranks again. New articles or leapfrogs change the amalgam of rating comparisons in any title group.

Conclusion

A fair opinion on Helium's rating system is that the concept can seem inherently unfair. Suppose there were nine articles of similar quality in a group and all of the articles are stellar compositions. The only difference is the style and tone of the articles. Helium's rating system will dictate that some of these would have to be at the top and some at the bottom. The idea is that the best will be at the top and the worst at the bottom. The person whose article is 9 out of 9 in that group may feel aggrieved. They would think that their article should not be the worst based on the effort that they put in.

Even though some poor articles rank highly, the "system" cannot take all of the blame. Are the raters rating the titles enough? Are they rating with consideration and quality? I am not always pleased about how my articles are ranked, but with time I notice that the ratings become more representative. Helium's rating system (though flawed) is fairer than it is given credit for. Still, if it were more transparent and not so cryptic or mysterious, we would be able to assess its fairness better.

Learn more about this author, Darrell Victor.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

---

Add your voice

Know something about Is the Helium rating system really fair ?
We want to hear your view. Write now!