Rating System

For my information, and for whomever might find this blog. Ratings, ratings, ratings:

Class A:

Exceptional, from my perspective. Requires technical precision as well as a striking
premise and execution. There must be some element of uniqueness and negligible wrong to find in my opinion, for me to deal out this rating.

Great, undeniably well written. Requires technical precision as well as either a premise or execution that invites some level of reverence. It may have something holding it back or it may be some manner of triteness that keeps it from getting a five-star rating.

Impressive, to my liking. Requires technical skill as well as a premise and execution that hit all the right notes without being generic. Minor problems may be present but regardless, the story holds water and then some.

Very good, has a something or another that makes it shine. Requires technical skill as well as a premise or execution that transgresses their kin, or does something unique/unexpected. There may be problems that don't significantly detract from the story. Everything this rating and up earns a recommendation. 

Class B:

Good, does well with its material. Requires technical competence as well as a premise and execution that fare well under scrutiny. Noticeable problems may be present if they don’t mar the story notably.

Decent, gets the job done efficiently. Requires technical competence as well as a premise and execution that don't flunk under scrutiny. Any systemic or directly story-related issue present should not spoil the story for it to earn this rating.

Passable, makes for some kind of entertainment. Requires technical competence as well as a premise and execution that don't fail miserably under scrutiny. There should be nothing significant enough to ruin the reading experience. Everything this rating and up may be recommended but with a stipulation.

Class C:

Poor, does not meet the standards to earn any kind of recommendation from me. Requires technical decency as well as a premise and execution with some level of thought put into them. Although laden with issues, maintains basic structural and grammatical integrity throughout.

Very poor, does not qualify as entertainment. Requires technical decency as well as a premise and execution with actual self-awareness behind them. Holds some sort of structural and/or grammatical integrity.

Atrocious, doesn't qualify as toilet paper. Requires technical decipherability and a discernible premise and execution. May be grammatically or structurally incomprehensible, or it may be artless by dint of how it handles its subject matter. Regardless, this story has something saving it from being completely irredeemable.   

Every rating is relative by necessity, right? Well, not this one. Requires nothing. The author probably had it coming at this point. This is an automatic default for apparent troll stories or for stories that somehow fail in the opposite direction of what they’re trying to accomplish. Beware!




Numerically Symbolic "Star" Rating System THAT I WILL USE FOR MY MINI-REVIEWS UNTIL SOMEBODY TELLS ME IT'S A BAD IDEA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ZERO: One star or less

0,5: One and half a star 

1: Two stars 

1,5: Two and half a star 

2: Three stars 

2,5: Three and half a star 

3: Four stars or more


It's much easier to rate unfinished stories––of which there are many––on a more relative scale, also being that I do not levy the same level of scrutiny on them. Note that if I hypothetically did choose to ordinary-review a mini-reviewed story, the rating granted originally wouldn't be fixed.