IMDb rating

thank you for the BOT reply. I would like an actual human reply why it doesnt update It seems like IMDb only updates mass-negative rating and blocks updating any positive? Why is that? Why IMDb blocks positive rating but, only allows mass-negative?

Hi Alux, We have escalated your concern to the appropriate team (ref. #D257949044). Though no immediate action may be taken, all reports are carefully examined so please rest assured that this will help us fine-tune and improve the effectiveness of our voting system. I will respond to this thread once we get an update from the team. Cheers!

Hi Alux, Thank you for your patience whilst we looked into this issue. Our team found no malicious voting or strange ratings behavior on this title, and confirmed that the average IMDb ratings are displaying correctly, per IMDb's weighted average system. Additionally, the number of ratings for this title are very low, and the rating averages would likely change after receiving more votes. For information on IMDb's weighted ratings, averages and more, please review the Ratings FAQ linked below: https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/track-movies-tv/ratings-faq/G67Y87TFYYP6TWAV# Thanks!

Hi "Additionally, the number of ratings for this title are very low, and the rating averages would likely change after receiving more votes." But, even tho its got its share of bad rating when you do the math, the weighted average is what it is, not 2, so it does not make sense why it shows 2, instead of what weighted average shows. the average (as of today) is 3.6 Ratings breakdown: 10 – 20 votes 9 – 7 votes 8 – 7 votes 7 – 4 votes 6 – 10 votes 5 – 6 votes 4 – 10 votes 3 – 16 votes 2 – 22 votes 1 – 80 votes Step 1: Multiply each rating by its vote count: (10×20) + (9×7) + (8×7) + (7×4) + (6×10) + (5×6) + (4×10) + (3×16) + (2×22) + (1×80) = 200 + 63 + 56 + 28 + 60 + 30 + 40 + 48 + 44 + 80 = 649 Step 2: Total number of votes: 20 + 7 + 7 + 4 + 10 + 6 + 10 + 16 + 22 + 80 = 182 Step 3: Average rating = 649 ÷ 182 = ≈ 3.57 So, the average IMDb rating is around 3.57 "Our team found no malicious voting or strange ratings behavior on this title" so why don't you show 3.6? It really does not make sense, it's as if someone on purpose holds the "2" and blocks. the link: https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/track-movies-tv/ratings-faq/G67Y87TFYYP6TWAV# - does not answer the question at all. it does however states that it blocks of there IS " malicious voting or strange ratings behavior", this clearly does not. So why? Just really trying to comprehend it :) Yes, I used chatgpt to help explaining the math hah :)

@Alux: You stated "the link: https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/track-movies-tv/ratings-faq/G67Y87TFYYP6TWAV# - does not answer the question at all." Actually, it does. The seventh question is "What does "weighted average" mean?". If you click on that, you'll see that IMDb doesn't use the "raw" average of all the votes, but a "weighted" average.

but it still does not make any sense WHY? The rating number is showing wrong rating. So on purpose makes the movie look worse all over the internet. "When unusual rating activity is detected, a different weighting calculation may be applied in order to preserve the reliability of our system. " "Our team found no malicious voting or strange ratings behaviour on this title," how does that make any sense with no proper explanation? It is like on purpose someone just plays with ratings inside IMDb

@Alux: You stated "but it still does not make any sense WHY?" IMDb uses a weighted average because there are people who try to influence the rating of titles. Therefore, some safeguards are necessary. See question 15 "I know for a fact that many people who negatively rated a title couldn't have seen it. Will you delete their ratings? They are clearly trying to negatively manipulate the rating." where IMDb states that "We are aware that there are people who may give a rating for the sole purpose of trying to lower the rating for a title (this happens both ways - there are just as many people who try to inflate a rating). We have several safeguards in place to automatically detect and defeat this type of ballot stuffing; even though we count and display all unaltered ratings in the rating breakdown, we apply several countermeasures against all attempts to skew the rating, and the weighted rating you see displayed on the site already takes all of the above into consideration."

Ozzy, the IMDb person clearly mentioned ""Our team found no malicious voting or strange ratings behaviour on this title," so the " people who try to influence the rating of titles. Therefore, some safeguards are necessary" is not correct in THIS title if: "Our team found no malicious voting or strange ratings behaviour on this title," why safeguarding and not updating CORRECT voting then.

In general, IMDb has several safeguards in place and uses weighted average. They do this for all titles in the database. In this specific case, because you asked them to, they checked this particular title and didn't find any malicious voting or strange ratings. But that doesn't mean that for this particular title they're gonna stop with the weighted average that they use for literally every other title in the database.

it makes completely ZERO sense at all. there are more recent better ratings and still IMDb doesnt update them at all. it is frozen at 2.1 but, it is pathetic that it is connected to Amazon and the 2 star ratings is all over the internet just because of this ridiculous platform that makes no sense at all. It is clear when the trailer first came out the title got so many 1 start rating without watching the movie, IMDb was like "yeah good, good, we approve" when the movie came out and people actually watched it and the recent ratings and even reviews are a bit better IMDb is like "naah, we don't approve, we keep it 2 cuz we don't like it, 2 it is for eternity, Why? oh because because, we got excuse our "system". Zero sense, zero logic, more of dictatorship. :( Oh well. IMDb can not be trusted at all then. Even on YouTube the movie got 94% positive ratings with positive comments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85sCl4rwqUw&t=1s

Any response? You said nothing was found but still 2.1 instead of 3.6? Why do you decide what to show? Doesnt make sense?