When VGHD is revamped the rating system needs to be rehauled too.

Why is the rating system 1-10?
If it is 1-10 that means there are cards of ALL numbers.
This means 5 is average. What is an average card actually?
All cards can't be the best and rated a 9 or 10.
Average here is 8 not 5.
No card here is 5 or below. 6 is worst by the standards we have here and that means the girl is average looking, bad costume, bad hairstyle, bad makeup, can't dance, and looks off to side often for direction. That would also be an old card.
None of the cards in past year have been overall bad. All are good. Personal taste if they are good or great.

If most cards are rated 7-10 that means you only rate a card a 1 because you ***** the girl or want to lower her overall rating. Plus I would bet most of the 1's are from members who don't own the card.
If you dislike a card so much to rate it 1,2,3 or 4 why did you buy it? You didn't.

New site needs a new rating system. Make it 1-5. It is 4 pt system now

I repeat...
You should only rate cards you own.

I agree that the rating system needs to be changed and only those who own a card should be allowed to rate it. I disagree with reducing the rating scale to 1-5 though.

In my view a 1-5 scale would only make things worse. Rather than most ratings being 7-10, it would simply mean that the vast majority of ratings would end up being 4-5 (where 4 equates to the current 8 and 5 to the current 10). It would just make a complete mockery of the rating system.

It would also make the situation for people like me, who have a more than a few cards rated 10, even worse. Where you have considerably more than 10 cards that have the maximum rating, the favourites list becomes pretty meaningless. On a scale of 1-5, all the cards that I personally think of as rated somewhere between 9 and 9.5 would have to be rated with the 5 instead of 9, adding even more maximums.

I think what we really need is a finer grained rating scale, e.g. 1-10 with increments of 0.1, or more simply just a % score 1-100

The system is a mockery now.
Peopl are rating cards they don't own and just throw out 9s and 10s like pez.

A percentage system just means more people rating 100% and there are no cards that are 40% or below. If there were totem and it's testers should have seen the card sucked overall and not made it available for sale.

let's be real. None of the cards overall are 1,2,or 3.
No card is rated below 4.
1 card below 5.
16 cards out of 535 are rated below 7.
442 cards of 535 are rated above 8.
So 83% of the cards are rated 8 or above.
3% are 7 or below.
14% of the cards are rated 7.0 to 7.99.

So why do we have ratings for below 7?
You ony rate 4 or below to ***** ratings. period.

And notice the bottom cards are mostly old, have ***** costume and makeup, poor filming, and most do not have explicit shows (and those that do are actually just a quick flash between legs). Poor silver dominates the bottom. These cards are the ones you get on your monthly and groan. The bottom 3%

The ratings scale used is irrelevant. A rating of 5 is equivalent to 50% average, which is a failing grade in the USA (i.e. an F) and close to failing in France. The ratings system shows a consensus among members that all cards are now at least borderline acceptable, but that doesn't justify stripping the possibility of lower ratings from the system.

I also think that many, many "bad" cards have been released in the last year, while the older cards are among the best this site has to offer. Some of these new cards I bought full-price or on special, some were added via subscription, but I have no qualms whatsoever in handing out zeros if I am not happy with the cards. The idea that older cards are low-quality and not worth collecting is an absurd myth in my view.

Rather than changing the ratings systems, Totem should focus on providing a more diverse line-up, better performers and more re-issues of the older cards.

Recenet cards have all been good. Not great but good.
Not liking a particular girl does, build, race or lack of explicit does not make her card bad. These are models and porn stars that make their living from millions of people buying their virtua cards, movies, dancing perfromances live and pictures.
Shabba and susie Q give great performances but because they dont have the soft sexy looks some of the favorites have they get low ratings.

1-10 does not work. Too extreme on each end.
People giving morgane 1 to balance out people giving her 10s.
Letting people vote on cards they do not own does not work.

Give a justification for giving jana cova a 1. Someone said they did because they don't like her. No reason.

Answer this ? What makes a card a 1 on a scale of 1 to 10 when 83% are rated 8 or higher? Nothing.

It takes 6 ratings of 10 to counter a 1 rating back to the average here of 8.5

Not letting people rate cards they don't own is a start.

I am almost sure that if Totem limit votes to owners only - the rating system will become more real - so real that all of you guys will be happy with it, no mather if it is 1-5, 1-10 or 1-100 based.

Or one more idea - give to platinums or golds that new extra - to see second rate calculated on owners votes only. Leave current rating to "general public" and give to loyal members look at second rate - more accurate rate I think.

Slayyer- I'm happy you think all recent cards are good. However, your opinion, while expressed as fact, doesn't make it fact.

I think numerous cards released in the last year sucked for such reasons as overall weak performances and lack of erotic content. I'd personally take Jana H's earliest cards over many of the new cards in a heartbeat.

If I feel excessively bored by a card I'll rate it low. If a girl can't dance/strip in a sexy way then I feel ripped-off. I'm not very interested in glamour models/porn stars on my desktop unless they can do a reasonable impersonation of a stripper. Many of the recent girls can't. But that's obviously entirely subjective- and the ratings have no impact on whether I enjoy the card or not.

Mostly, I see little logic in simultaneously deriding the lack of ratings distribution, while applauding recent production and discrediting low ratings. The lack of lower-rated cards proves nothing other than a general satisfaction among members with the cards

Well, in my opinion... Most sites using a star grade to measure a popularity. Five stars are a maximum. No stars, not popular.
A 0-10 grade make sense to scholar measures, but works.

In my time here and many posts I never try express my opinion on "quality" as fact. Laws and regulations are fact. Saying a blond is prettier than a brunette is not.

Fact- overall performance can NOT be rated if you don't see all the clips of a card.

Erotic is subjective. Grading a performance is subjective.
Fault can be found in any performance. A team can win a game by alot and you can still point out the flaws. Go to an art museum and you will find art you do not like and think is bad. Music that is called the greatest classics of all time might not appeal to you.

Ratings are subjective. No criteria. I can rate all girls that don't pole dance no higher than 8. Someone can have 10 memberships here, own no cards, yet they gave 10 ratings each to each card.

Fact- In the past 6 months only 2 new cards have ratings under 8.
Both are shabba. They are still rated abover average. Good = satisfactory. Didn't say excellent or great. All recent cards have been good is true statement.

@slayyer
If you don't think any card on the site is worth less than 4, how does a rating scale of 1-5 make any sense?

By your argument, no card is worth less with than 40% of the maximum available rating (i.e. 4 in the current system), but the scale you propose still allows a rating of 1, which would be equivalent to 20% (or 2 under the current system). Surely by your own arguments, what you really want is a scale ranging from 4-10 ?

I think one thing we probably can agree on is that the "0" option should be removed, since I would say (and I hope you would as well) that no card on vghd is absolutely worthless. In my view, the "0" rating serves no purpose except as a magnet for ratings attackers.

I also still think it's a mistake to limit the range within which users can rate cards to less than it is now though, when I (and I'm sure many other users) would really like to be able to sort out the 10s and 9s from the 9.5s, 8.5s, e.t.c.

Slayyer-- Interesting...well it's a bit disingenuous to justify your statement that all recent cards are "good" based on their rankings, while at the same time claiming that the rating system is subjective, manipulated and needs to be overhauled.

Furthermore, Shabba's cards rate well below both the median ranking (approximately 8.65) and the average rating. Her lowest-ranked card rates 524th out of 535 cards. That's low no matter what scale you want to use or what scheme is used to offset low rankings. What counts is the ranking between the cards, not some perceived cut-off point for "good" or "bad" cards.

I think perhaps we should actually concentrate on first things first here. Rather than arguing about what rating scale we should use, lets accept the scale as it is for the meantime and concentrate on trying to get a system where only those who own cards can rate them.

I reckon if you started a poll on whether we should prevent those who don't own cards from rating them and discount all the ratings made already by non-card owners, very few people if any would vote against.

In the specific case of Shabba, it really astounds me that absolutely excellent cards such as "Pool Party" get such low ratings and I can only conclude that most of those who rate her low haven't actually seen her shows. I would be prepared to bet that if all those who rate cards without owning them were discounted, Shabba's cards would have overall ratings that were at very least in the 8.5 - 9 range.

Disagreeing with a system does not mean you do not abide by it.
I don't like that they changed the calandar system but i have to abide by the current system.

The medium for this site does not change what is medium for a 1-10 system. Medium/average is 5.5
Only 1 card on this site ranked below average using the 1-10 system.

It is easier to disagree than substantiate your own statements. What makes a card bad?

Based on the current ranking system of 1-10 there have been no bad cards recently. All have been above average or better. Good.
The difference between average "rated' cards and top rated cards is slim at best. From top to middle is less than 1 point. Top is 9.35 and medium is 8.65

And I repeat my first suggestion-------
Do not allow voting on cards not owned.

Nomatter the system used (1-5, 1-10, stars, penguins) disallow voting on cards not in your collection.

@slayyer
Your final statement has my full support.

Is there any way over and above just a simple poll that we can use to get Totem to take some notice?

I remember totemrex answering this before & his answer was along the lines of, (I'm paraphrasing here),"We allow members to rate whether they've bought cards or not. Ratings by members who have not bought cards are given less weight."
So while this thread has been very thoughtful & interesting to read, it seems that Totem has made up their minds on this issue. It has been discussed often since Rex's statement to no avail, so other than direct PM's to Rex, it seems we can only hope for Totem to evolve along lines that we think are beneficial (as stated in this thread)perhaps nudged on by these discussions.
To me rating means"what I think of the babe/card" If non buyers can rate cards then ratings mean next to nothing! I truly believe that, Morgane rates higher than Silver for honest "bought the card" reasons.That there's the chance that many non buyers can rate it it's "proof" as choice is nearly non existent.
Totem should stop the non buyer rating PERIOD. Then ratings mean something!

I didn't even realize that non-buyers could rate cards. That's complete horseshit. How can you rate something you haven't seen?

"The steak at that restaurant is *****."
"When was the last time you ate there?"
"I've never eaten there, I just know it's *****."

hello, we can work on several system of rate, it Totem not made a simple addition in final, we never can't have the real number. i think we must not dream about a real system rate !!!! but of course i am ok for ask one real system of rate (in option - addition of all rate for all models), if of course Totem want made it and if is have the time. for the moment we must wait again, because Totem work on new projet for us.

but sometime i am interesed to see what is the show and girl préféred by all user. then courage Totem !!!! one addition lllooolll !!!! ;-)

ho trailers or not trailers have no importance, not forget the site is free and i think the user who have not show must have the right to rate and in any case, who have rate must go on the site and that give the possibility to the user to buy a show, if this option is remove the user not stay on the site. not forget lol Totem need several money also for made several show !!!!

One thing that worries me about the current rating system, is the emphasis Totem put on it for publicity and promotion purposes. I've been considering building a web site so that I can affiliate to TotemCash recently, and have been doing quite a bit of research into good search terms for optimisation purposes, e.t.c. Most recently I compiled a list of the top 20 most searched for vghd girls on google.
http://www73.virtuagirlhd.com/us/forum_post.php?foId=3&ftId=10308


The fact that Totem tend to use the highest rated girls for publicity and promotion purposes is actually not very helpful in terms of optimisation. The girls with the highest ratings on vghd in very few cases are the ones most searched for on the wider internet. Of the girls with cards rated 9 or over, only Jana Cova appears in the top 5 girls in terms of google searches. Yet it is these high rated girls that Totem give preference in promotional terms, rather than the most searched for.

(cont in next post)

The most searched for vghd girl in google by a factor of 4 more than any other single girl is Aria Giovanni. Yet Totem don't even provide any banners or other promotional materials for her among their affiliation tools and resources, preferring to provide materials for much less popular girls who happen to have higher ratings in vghd.

I feel this emphasis on high rated girls as opposed to genuinely popular girls is not only counterproductive in terms of affiliation, but is also a poor business strategy in terms of vghd in general. This will continue to be a problem until Totem either pay less regard to ratings or sort out the ratings system to prevent the influence of multiple accounts and ratings attacks on specific girls, in which case the ratings may reflect genuine popularity more accurately.

Preventing users who don't own cards from rating them would certainly be a step in the right direction.

I have 9 years experience in SEO for a major commercial web site, by the way.

Well, give a look on new members sites and you'll also see that the rating-system must be overhauled.
MidnightStar for exemple; a new member with 1 fullshow: Vicky S/Golden River...
but her favorite VirtuaGirl = ...Morgane !!!???

How can that be the favorite girl without see the fullshows???

the awnsers is easy rene, when the new user see the picture, is made a choose, is have several critere also, and i not really need to see a show or a trailler, and after when the user anderstand is can rate for the show is made several change.


when i start VGHD i use the system rate, but for several personnal raison i stop later to use this system.

we think the same way often Alerte ;-)

i did rate again my latest cards but did only see by 1 of them an effect to the score; so for the other models nothing did change after i did give a rate.

@LuckyRene If you want to see your rating counting, you should hurry to rate the new cards as soon as they're released. Lol.

Hum, that might be the reason why so many rush to rate those. Weird, anyhow. :)

@Oquijan; only by Shabba i did see the result change with +0,01 because that card was set too low right from the release on!
Other cards are set so high right from the release that a rate do not change the result for some reason.

All by all the consequenz is that the rating-system do not show what the customers really think.

IMO Totem doesnt want to stop non-owner votes because after that the overall ratings will fall a lot, and that will not look good for new comer to see many cards below 5 for example... and not much higher than 9.

exact for that reason i think about not giving away any ratings from now on ~ it simple have no effect ;-)

@mvpsome
I really don't see the logic of your argument.

People currently can have multiple accounts and can rate cards with each account even if they don't buy them. This makes it easy to make concerted ratings attacks against specific cards which ***** down their ratings. Others simply rate cards low because they don't like the look of specific girls on the strength of a few pictures, whereas if they watched the full shows they might be inclined to rate these girls higher.

I don't think the overall rating would fall significantly at all if those who don't own cards weren't allowed to rate them. The ratings would fall for some girls and rise for others. The main point being that the ratings would be much fairer and, hopefully, would more accurately reflect the genuine popularity of the girls.

for sure - now its pointless to vote.