by Lucius Trae

Created on: May 12, 2010

The Helium rating system isn't perfect, but it isn't complete nonsense. If you can't get five rating stars, it's unlikely you're the next Shakespeare. That being said, there are things that unfairly hurt your rating. People often judge articles based on arbitrary criteria, and this ends up altering the writing score of good writers. Some writers don't recognize how popularity plays into success when being rated. Shakespeare was an expert at this, but not all writers care about opinions of others. On Helium, someone who ignores certain factors can be the best writer in the world, but they'll still have some struggles. Here is a list of issues with the rating system.

1. Uninformed Readers: People are often misinformed about factual issues, and your confidence will be mistaken as arrogance or stupidity. If you cite a study about the scientific conclusion that magic rocks don't cure cancer, someone who believes in magic rocks will rate you down and mock your foolishness. The politeness and most uncontroversial articles can often do the best, but there is controversy in a great deal of interesting topics. This means you have to either limit your article choices or apply some self-censorship.

2.  Lazy Readers: Some people don't read the entire article when rating. I know this because I didn't for the first ten articles or so that I rated. It didn't get me the percent I needed, but I learned how to rate properly. Although I read articles now to learn information and do my fair share, I could easily devise a system to exploit things. This means people too lazy to read something in full will judge based on a specific section, usually the opening or conclusion. This could be the weakest part of the article.

3. The People Scared of Paragraphs: There is a point when a paragraph becomes too long, but this varies from person to person. You will never satisfy some people who just can't take even average length paragraphs. This gives people who use lists, short sentences, and spacing an advantage over someone writing a more academic-style article. I've got two of the three so let's see if my own analysis has any accuracy fairly soon.

4. The Religious Cheaters: I see this all the time in debate articles and other more subjective topics. This isn't intended to be a criticism of religion, but arguments are supposed to be taken from the ground up. You are supposed to be able to convince someone of any background that you are correct. As a result, I wouldn't assume that my

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>