Rough
0–4.9
Mixed
5–6.9
Great
7–8.9
Exceptional
9+

How scores work

Every review carries two scores: what the critic thinks and what the audience thinks. Neither is a vibe — both are computed, and this page shows the math. Two scores, zero secrets.

01 · The critic score

A weighted verdict, not a gut number

Each section has its own criteria — movies get Story, Acting, Visuals, Sound and Rewatchability; tech gets Design, Performance, Battery and friends. Every review scores each criterion from 0.0 to 10.0, and each criterion has a weight that says how much it matters. The critic score is the weighted average, rounded to one decimal.

Weights can be tuned per review: Sound weighs more for a musical, Battery weighs more for a phone you carry all day. The breakdown on every review page always shows the effective weight actually used — if a criterion doesn't apply, it's simply left out of the average, never counted as a zero.

A tiny worked example

Story ×1.5
8.0

Weighted up — it matters most here.

Visuals ×1
9.0
Sound ×0.5
7.0

Weighted down for this review.

(8.0 × 1.5) + (9.0 × 1) + (7.0 × 0.5) = 24.5

total weight = 1.5 + 1 + 0.5 = 3.0

24.5 ÷ 3.0 = 8.166… → rounded to one decimal

Critic score

weighted mean

02 · The audience score

Why 3 ratings of 10 isn't a 10.0

Anyone can rate any review 0–10 — no account needed, one rating per person, editable any time. But a plain average is fragile when few people have voted: one troll (or one superfan) would own the number. So we use the same idea as IMDb's Top 250 — a Bayesian average.

The score behaves as if 10 phantom ratings at an average score already existed. With a handful of real ratings the prior dominates and the score stays cautious; by around fifty ratings the crowd has fully drowned it out. Skepticism at low numbers is the feature.

That average is per section, not site-wide. People rate films, series and hardware differently, and smoothing a film toward a number that mostly describes how readers rate headphones would be the wrong kind of caution. A section needs 50 ratings before it is trusted to describe itself; under that it borrows the site-wide mean.

The priors, right now

Movies
6.50
borrowing the site mean
Series
6.50
borrowing the site mean
Games
6.50
borrowing the site mean
Tech
6.50
borrowing the site mean

Recomputed nightly from every rating that has not been excluded for abuse — a confirmed bombing campaign can never drag a whole section's prior down with it.

Three perfect 10s arrive…

Audience score

3 ratings

(10+10+10 + 10 × 6.5) ÷ (3 + 10) = 7.3, not 10.0 — and that's the point. You never have to take that on faith: while a score is still mostly prior, the review page prints the plain reader average next to it and says so in words, so you can see exactly how much of the number is the crowd and how much is caution.

03 · Review bombs

When ratings get weird

Sometimes a review attracts a sudden burst of coordinated 0s (or 10s) that has nothing to do with the thing being reviewed. An automatic check runs every hour and looks for two things happening at once in the last 24 hours:

A velocity spike

Far more ratings in a day than this review normally gets — at least 10, and at least 5× its usual daily pace. A quiet post needs a real crowd to trip this, so a handful of genuine haters never does.

A distribution shift

The burst is overwhelmingly extreme — 70%+ scores of ≤2 or ≥9 — and looks nothing like the review's rating history. Organic opinion is messy; bombs are uniform.

What a bomb looks like

A healthy bell of opinions — plus a wall of brand-new zeros.

54 ratings, nothing hidden.

When both signals fire, ratings from that 24-hour window are de-weighted to ×0.25 — not deleted, not hidden. Legitimate raters caught in the window still count, just less. The adjustment is logged publicly, and the review immediately shows a notice like this one:

An unusual burst of 0–1 ratings arrived within a few hours — far outside this review's normal pattern. Ratings from that window count at reduced weight.

Raw score
6.4
Adjusted
8.1

Based on 990 ratings. Affected window: Apr 18, 2026 – Apr 19, 2026. Ratings in the window count at reduced weight — nothing is deleted or hidden. Method: window_deweight_0.25.

How scores work

A human reviews every flag

The detector only ever flags automatically — it never gets the last word. The site owner reviews each flagged window with its full histogram and either confirms the adjustment or dismisses it, which instantly restores every rating to full weight. Dismissed windows are remembered and never re-flagged.

04 · The promise

Nothing is adjusted in the dark

  • The raw score is never hidden

    Whenever a score is adjusted, the unadjusted number stays one tap away — on the notice, forever.

  • Every adjustment is disclosed on the page

    The reason, the affected window, and the exact method name are shown right next to the score. No silent corrections.

  • Ratings are never deleted or edited

    De-weighting is the only tool the pipeline has. Your rating always remains visible in the histogram.

  • The math is public

    This page is the documentation. If the formula changes, this page changes.