Gear Rater rating system

Tonight I added a couple of reviews to the GR.


In the system the higher the rating the 'better' it is for the use. When I see these rating types I look for the highest total or average.

It seems to me that a professional user would put more use on the gear in more varied situations. Pro climbers don't only stake their lives on the gear like any climber they also stake their living. Climbing isn't optional for the pro. If a piece of gear doesn't perform at the highest level it will potentially cost the user money. That would seem to give the pro user a heavier use rating. Your system scales things the opposite way.

I know, I know...my perception is skewed because I am primarily a pro arborist. But, I place the same performance demands on my rec gear. Using the 3 rating doesn't seem equitable.


Type of use: 1=Professional, 5=Recreational, 3=Both

Tom, The gear ratings I think are not cumulative because they refer to for example Frequency of use 1 is RTC but 5 is professional /Arborist. So there it refer to type of user not the gear itself.
Knowledge to Use it. 1 is Low knowledge and 5 is High level of Knowledge.
So I think that RTclimbers will rate the gear different than a ProClimber but both are Ok in the end. (No sure if I conveyed what I was trying to say.)

A piece of gear rated at say total 20pts from someone is not worse than one rated 30 by someone else. I think the user needs to pay attention to the writing part of the rating to get a better idea of what and how it was rated.

Other issue. Someone hates a piece of gear so they give low rating all across but someone loves the same gear and gives them \"High ratings\" for some other reason but both are fine in their rating. The writing explanation is the one I put more value than the total numeric Value.