Rod While the rating concept is theoretically good, in practice, it often proves meaningless. For one thing, the process is easily riggable; for another, a rating is only valuable, particcularly when few votes are cast, if we know something about who cast the vote. For one person, an ap may be valuable; for another is ok. To me, as an example, a "5" is only warranted is something is truly outstanding; a good ap should probably get a 4. That illustrates the whole problem with the system as about the only vbalue most of these rating approaches have is to provide ego rubs for the ap creators if they draw high numbers which you can help insure by telling folks you trust or your "friends" to vote for it. And, you would have never complained if the single vote was a 5 (or perhaps even a 4) as that is what you wanted to see. I am not an ap creator -- I couldn't create one if my life depended on it -- but if I drew low numbers -- especially from a good number of people -- I'd try to figure out where the complaint lies. What might seem flawless and perfect to you or me might not be that for someone else.
Some rating systems -- such as Amazon, Newegg and bay -- seem to function better given larger user bases and what is at stake. The way I look at a free ap is I get what I pay for it. Hopefully, it will do for me what I hope it can do; but, on the other hand, the developer probably, in most instances, created it for what they wanted to do and if it benefits me, so be it. And, oh yes, an ap or programm fails for me not because there is something wrong with it but the problem is on my end. I will not trust in riches but in him who richly provides. Andy Stanley, pastor, from his new book "How to Be Rich: It' Not What You Have. It's What You Do With What You Have."
