home of the
Bitpedia
digital media encyclopedia
About, Products, Download, Search, Browse, Discuss, BitSocieties, Help
Bitzi works
best with Bitzi-Powered Applications.
How To Rate Files and Tags
In general, personal taste issues shouldn't be captured in file judgements.When judging a file, you make one of seven preset statements about the file, described below. Note that you are are judging the file, not the work the file digitally encapsulates.
For example, suppose you think Song A is a great song and generally underappreciated. You have two copies (files) of the song. One is a flawless reproduction, the other has skips in the middle. You'd want to rate the flawless copy "Best Version" (if you have reason to believe a more flawless copy is not likely to exist -- "Recommended" if you don't want to make quite so strong a claim) or "Complete" if the copy is simply complete (though superior copies are likely), or even "Underrated" if you feel others have wrongly judged the file as flawed in some manner.
What about the file with skips? You might be tempted to judge it "Recommended", as you think the song is generally underappreciated. However, remember you are judging the file, not the song. You would probably want to judge the file "Imcomplete/Damaged", as it contains skips. Your judgement does not condemn the song in question, it only points out that the particular copy has problems. Your negative judgement will actually help other fans of the song avoid the copy with skips, to the betterment of all fans of that song.
Things you shouldn't hold against a file
Bad Filename
An incorrect or incomplete filename should never be a reason to judge a file negatively. The filename can be changed without changing the contents of a file. Bitzi catalogs files based on their contents, not their names. Rather than judging the file harshly, rate the accuracy of the filename tag negatively, and apply a new, correct filename tag.Bad Embedded Metadata
Some files contain information about the files inside the files themselves, thus the file metadata is embedded in the file itself. Often embedded metadata will be icomplete and/or incorrect (nearly always in the case of MP3's "ID3"). Bitzi addresses this problem by providing external metadata which may be reviewed and corrected.
Often bad embedded
metadata does not affect the quality of the work digitally encapsulated in
the file. For example, an execellent MP3 encoding of a song accompanied
by incorrect ID3 information (artist, album, etc.) sounds just as good
as the same encoding with correct ID3 information. Thus, a file with
bad embedded metadata generally shouldn't be rated "Incomplete/Damaged"
or "Dangerous/Misleading" only due to bad embedded metadata.
However, bad embedded metadata may dissuade you from
recommending a file or touting it as the best version.
Available Judgements
- Best Version
- There's no reason to think a superior copy exists. Note that there could be multiple "best" copies. For example, a 192kbps encoding of a song and a 64kbps encoding may both be the "best" available copies in different contexts - the first where uncompromising quality is most important, the second where small filesize is most important. This is a very fuzzy area - use your best bitizen judgement!
- Recommended
- You recommend this copy to others interested in the encapsulated work. Presumably this means the file is complete and has no obvious flaws. This is a good judgement to use if you wholeheartedly endorse a file, but aren't so sure that better versions aren't likely to exist.
- Complete
- The file in question isn't truncated or otherwise damaged.
- Normal
- You can't vouch for the file's quality, but can't find anything to complain about either.
- Substandard
- The file's overall quality is low (e.g., obvious pixelization in the case of a video file).
- Incomplete/Damaged
- The file is truncated or otherwise incomplete or contains serious errors (e.g., skips in the case of an audio file).
- Dangerous/Misleading
- The file is potentially dangerous (e.g., software containing a virus) or wholly intended to deceive (e.g. with surprise advertising or illegal content spliced in). Do not use this rating if a file is simply misnamed, in its Bitpedia entry or on P2P networks. Instead, correct the filename separately and then rate the file as if it were correctly named.
Explanation
Whenever you judge a file, you may optionally provide an explanation for your judgement. Doing so is highly recommended. Things you may wish to include in your explanation:- Where you obtained the file (particularly if you downloaded the file from an "official" web site). Any URLs included in the explanation will be displayed as links. Example:
Recommended Downloaded from http://www.sonicyouth.com/mp3
- If you judged a file positively, say why, especially if you can't give a source URL:
Complete Same track length as CD
- If you judged a file negatively, say why. Examples:
Incomplete/Damaged Truncated after 14 seconds, don't propagate this bad download!
Dangerous/Misleading File infected with virus
Judging vs. Tagging vs. Discussing
In some cases you may question whether it is more appropriate to judge a file with explanation or apply the same information via a tag, e.g., Related URL, Objective Description, or Subjective Comment. You can always do both. In general information entered into new tags should be of lasting value (e.g., an official band URL vs. a possibly transient download URL) and should be relatively well thought out (e.g., "this file is junk!" might be passable in a judgement explanation, but it would be horrible as tag content.More general discussion relevant across many files may take place in the catchall Content Discussion forum or artist/genre-specific BitSociety forums.
Rating Tag Accuracy
When rating a tag, you're judging how accurately the tag describes the tagged file, not the tag content itself. For example, if an absolutely correct and complete Audio Track tag describing Uptown Girl by Billy Joel is applied to a copy of Blues by Muddy Waters, the tag should be rated down. If you see the same tag applied to a copy of Uptown Girl, rate it up! A tag might also contain garbage not relevant to any useful file. In this case, always rate the tag down. You have five available tag accuracy ratings:++ You're certain the tag is complete, accurate, and useful+ The tag contains useful information, but may not be 100% complete.
The tag contains useful information, but is very incomplete and/or has relatively trivial errors.
- The tag contains more errors than useful and truthful information.
-- The tag is garbage and/or misleading.
289,416 bitizens have contributed 15,613,192 tags about 3,146,691 files.