Do people find the rating system useful?

Well, I just had a look at the grade scale...function is not mentioned.

Dave

I totally agree -A lot of people are not reading the grading scale used here on the 'gon - I saw a recent picture of some Thiels listed here with a severely damaged corner and they are listed as an "8"- I'm tempted to write to them and explain, however, it probably would'nt be worthwhile

o you think it is implied, or is the scale for appearance only?

I think it is implied that the component functions and I see no mention untill you get to the 2/10 scale which states:

(Electronics have major dents, knobs are missing, but they sort of work.)

Dave

Sogood, I agree. If something is broken partially - it should be rated 1/10 or 2/10. I just sold a Mac MR-80 with one channel bad, but in 7/10 cosmetic condition, but I rated it 2/10 because of the malfunction. That's the way it should be IMO.

Somewhat, as it depends on the seller's reputation & ability to grade with objectivity.

I have found a lot of seller's rate their stuff one grade too high & occasionally it's an outright lie.

Pictures do tell the story & in fact I recently decided a seller's rating of 9 was impossible because of several factors, the most important being I could see some marks. The seller claimed the unit was perfect but I'm going by what I saw.

Sidenote-gonna miss the next RAS

I would assume that the component functions with an 8/10 rating. I find people continually misuse the grading scale here on Audiogon. I find it upsetting because we are a small community and need to be far with eachother.

Chuck

Maybe Bush could legislate honesty in the sales of used audio components on the net?

I would assume that the component functions with an 8/10 rating. I find people continually misuse the grading scale here on Audiogon. I find it upsetting because we are a small community and need to be far with eachother.

I, too, would have assumed so, up until maybe a year ago or so. There seems to have been something of a "gold-rush" lately, expanding the "small community" and consisting of sellers out to make themselves some dough by hook or crook, and making themselves hard to distinguish from the honest and caring individuals from whom I could pretty much always count on dealing with in the previous past.

Wow another gem from Pbb. What's the matter, no ambulances to chase, eh???

Maybe AudiogoN will have to include the word "WORKING" in their description. This should not be needed, but some folks follow the letter of the law and ignore the spirit.

It has gotten to where I probably notice as many incorrect ratings as I do fair ones. I have sometimes considered emailing sellers to alert them of the mistake if it's just outrageously off, but I never do on the grounds that it would probably be an argument akin to explaining vegetarianism to a fat sweaty guy at a steak house.

I think Audiogon should make the rating system more clearly explained and visible to sellers listing their items; also, a two-scale system might be interesting: one for cosmetics, one for functionality.

Finally, I think sellers should face up to what they have and rate their gear more objectively. Perhaps there could even be some kind of penalty for gross misrepresentation of items if it can be proven--but I amgine that would get a bit dodgy.

Thanks everyone, I feel better knowing that I wasn't off base thinking that the selected rating for the non functioning item was quite selfserving. It does make the rating system as implemented, fall suspect to its value.