Feedback equals no feedback?

George Karnes · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 13:58 (GMT) Post subject: Feedback equals no feedback?

So I am looking at the ratings I have. Some high and some low. I realize that for the most part I have no idea why a high one is high or a low one is low.

Isn't it time for us to know why we get a high or low rating? I really feel that the current "ratings" system is worse than no rating at all.

There are tons of off the shelf feedback software packages. Many good ones are freeware or shareware and are customizable.

There are two basic means of feedback that are functional and informative.

1. Comments and a rating.

2. A series of ratings such as:
Production quality 1-5
Voice match 1-5
Quality of read 1-5

Or some such set of criteria. This current system is really, really bad.

Finally, it is patently unfair for a seeker to be able to rate a talent but not have a talent rate a seeker.

I have heard all about how things are done in the "real world" with agents, and all the other antiquated stuff.

Folks this is the Internet. Things should be different. Things should be better. Things should be more equitable.

Most of you know me and know I am a pretty easy going, non-complaining kind of a guy. But I have worked in technology all my life and I know how much more effective a "real" feedback system could be.

Steve J. Mark · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 14:17 (GMT) Post subject:

I hear ya George. The current rating system means nothing to me. I don’t even look at it anymore.

The rating software is a great idea. That would really help talent understand their strengths and weaknesses of a submitted read.
Well done.

~S

Tom Pagnotti · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 16:46 (GMT) Post subject:

George:

First, you can "rate the job" with regard to budget, information provided and so on. (Though I don't know that the voice seeker gets to see it)

But as far as talent ratings go - you may not be seeing this from the producers prospective. To stop and rate in several different categories would add more time to each audition. (Know any producers that have spare time these days?) Frankly, the way things have been going, I'm just happy that the producer actually listens to my audition.

And BTW: Of my past four gigs from V123 only one has rated me.

I understand your frustration - but it would appear to me that not too many producers take the ratings seriously

Robert Jadah · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 18:13 (GMT) Post subject:

September Day Leach · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 18:22 (GMT) Post subject:

Tom Pagnotti · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 18:26 (GMT) Post subject:

BTW: Of my past four gigs from V123 only one has rated me. Robert you may have misunderstood.... of auditions I actually won, only one of them rated me. (Conversely I've received a "5" when the average score was 3.4 and heard nothing) I'm just not certain that NOT scoring really matters. But since the new stats are ranked from the month of September - it would appear that you are being royally screwed.

George Karnes · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 19:05 (GMT) Post subject:

I am just saying there is virtually no way to gain any thing of value from the current ratings system and in the end all it can do is hurt you.

There is zero upside. You get nothing from it that tells you what you should work on. At least in the old days of a live audition, someone might say "too much accent" or "not enough vocal inflection". You could get some idea of what you need to work on.

This "new improved" model is actually worse from this respect than the old way it was done.

As for the amount of time it takes who cares.

If the seeker has the time then rate me but do it in a way that has some actual meaning. If they don't have time, don't rate me.

The way it is right now is worse than useless.

Robert Jadah · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 19:26 (GMT) Post subject:

John Bigl · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 20:11 (GMT) Post subject:

"cod-piece" ?? those legal ? can they block a slap shot?

as for the V123 ratings, i'm indifferent towards them...

the only feedback of value are the checks for completed gigs, and those of the fellow VO folks here... oh, and my acting coach, she is such a sweetie...

Be Well

George Karnes · Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007, 21:30 (GMT) Post subject:

I usually only break out my cod-piece on weekends when I have a gig hunting "Dollar a Holler" guys with a blunderbuss.

Most of the rate this project items are for V123, but it makes my point exactly. They are trying to get useful information for themselves thus 8 different rating criteria.

Why do you think they don't have just a single radio button for rate this project? It is because they would get no usable information from it. Just like we get no usable information from a single rate this audition radio button.

I was tempted to just ignore the whole thing too but I think we ignore it at our own peril.

Remember when banks first put in ten cent ATM fees. They were pretty easy to ignore. But what do they run now 2, 3, 5 dollars.

Bad systems that are ignored eventually come back to haunt you. Right now, they aren't really filtering much based on those ratings because the system is too buggy. But when they start using it a lot of folks are going to wish they had insisted on something that at least took the talent into account.

Rate this project: 8 criteria gives usable information to V123,
seeker doesn't even see it.

Rate this talent: 1 Criteria No usable information, Potentially
trashes the talent.

John Bigl · Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007, 00:14 (GMT) Post subject:

Diane Vair

although I'm new here, I completely agree with the rant against the rating system...really not much of system at all. It definitely needs more descriptors. The only way to get people to respond is to provide an incentive to the voice seekers - I have no idea what that would be, maybe it works like frequent flyer miles so if they reach a certain number of ratings they are rewarded.

Thanks for letting me chime in
Diane V

George Karnes · Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007, 03:44 (GMT) Post subject:

Well I see that V123 has made an interface change on the Stats page and darned if they haven't made it even more useless. They have gone from a page that shows a rating that gives you no usable information to a page that hides your actual rating and still gives you no usable information.

Let me see if I can recap this:

1. Talents complain about the ratings system.
2. V123 hides actual ratings while still using them to filter us from leads.

What is wrong with this picture. Isn't this back to the hidden system they had before?

Bettye Zoller

I agree totally with posts here advocating improved rating system. No one knows what a rating score MEANS! Perhaps a likert scale should be given to clients so they quickly can score auditioners, such as 1to 5 points with 1 being horrible and 5 being fabulous but NAME the items, such as:
voiceover captured flavor/intent I am looking for
voiceover talent's pricing structure
voiceover talent's recording quality
voiceover talent's voice quality for my project

And what does it mean when an audition gets no rating score but on the next line, it says "average score 3.9"? What does this mean to ME, the voiceover auditioner who was not rated? And why was I not rated when others were? This is the most burning question to me! How can we either do away with the ratings altogether or insure that every audition that is listened to gets rated? I know many say this is "hopeless" as a quest but...

Ronald T Robinson · Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007, 00:23 (GMT) Post subject:

I'd rather not be rated at all - given the lack of credibility of so many Seekers.

These auditions, after all, are going to folks who, for the most part, have failed utterly in describing what they want from Talent - other than "not over-the-top or 'cheesy'".

Further, before accepting a critique from anyone, I want to know: their experience, the state they're in at the time and the medications they're on! Smile