@KL-666
I've read many comments/arguments/takes=on the issue of rating.
I think a "vote" system may allow for ponderation or averaging of opinions. Rating could even be continuous scale as oppose to a discrete scale (like 3.25, for example), if several opinions are averaged.
Also, averaging, when not a large enough "sample size" may be sensitive to extreme or very opinionated people. But as an alternative a median type of computation could be used for balancing this issue (besides, on a discrete variable, the mean remains as integer, so that could approach that).
All of the rating topics (FDM, cockpit, model, ...) are complex issues, and although there is a "guideline", applying such guideline does not seem to be clear cut to me. And some people will definitely be more qualified to judge an FDM than others. (compare you and I). Also, a handful of aircraft may have alternative FDM versions, and only one FDM rank. The different FDMs could be widely spared in separation of qualities, thou.
I don't foresee an immediate brilliant idea to deal with these situations, and the heavy opinions certain topics, such as FDM, creates. Yet, what you state, remains uncontroversial to me: Several aircraft are over-rated.
But on the other hand, referring to getting @bugman paper-cut bugs he can tackled, here is another one
@bugman::A large number of aircraft LACK a rating section in one or several -set.xml files. These are great to have, plus they are kind of required for the future QT5 Aircraft download section. He could maybe create a "rating" section initially filled with 0, indicating Not-rating available yet! . Having the section rated as zero, could allow easy re-rating in the foreseeable future
What you guys think?