And have some respect for your community. It needs to be the default option. You can't make big changes just like that because you thought it's “a good idea”.
Bigboffer
•
Apr 17
The Trakt team behaves like the EU, which is always better for everyone.
My subscription is still valid until December, if it works again, I only have to cancel.
Eddy555
•
Mar 31
So this has been rejected, it would be good if the development team could explain why it’s been rejected.
Zoomomax
•
Mar 31
Agree. What a shame!
liachra
•
Apr 1
Unreject this admins your users clearly hate your new UI choices.
Zoomomax
•
Mar 15
Also the UI/UX choice are bad and counter-intuitive on v3. v2 : clear view of our rating, (twice actually), red color so it appears clearly, that 1) we rated it and 2) how much.
vs v3:
Half star (no thanks), not visual (Rate - starts - hearth = ?!), weird location (why at the very botton), white color and orange when mouse hovering. Wtf is this?
Sopherian
•
Apr 6
Rejected why?!
Shinobi-vs-Gast
•
Apr 12
Way to listen to your paying customers…
You didn’t even give us a reason why this request is being denied.
ofabiofarias
•
Mar 5
It would be interesting to update the definitions of each rating. Having the "fair" option at level 6 is too high a rating to be considered weak, isn't it? There are more levels to say that something is bad than good.
ragreynolds
•
Mar 6
I disagree. Fair is not a bad rating. The only descriptions I didn't like were for 1/10 and 10/10. Weak sauce and totally ninja are not good labels. But yeah, there are not more levels to say something is bad than good. 6-10 are all good. 1-4 are all bad. 5 is neutral.
Log in to comment and vote
Comments10
Zoomomax
Mar 23
And have some respect for your community. It needs to be the default option. You can't make big changes just like that because you thought it's “a good idea”.
Bigboffer
Apr 17
The Trakt team behaves like the EU, which is always better for everyone.
My subscription is still valid until December, if it works again, I only have to cancel.
Eddy555
Mar 31
So this has been rejected, it would be good if the development team could explain why it’s been rejected.
Zoomomax
Mar 31
Agree. What a shame!
liachra
Apr 1
Unreject this admins your users clearly hate your new UI choices.
Zoomomax
Mar 15
Also the UI/UX choice are bad and counter-intuitive on v3.
v2 : clear view of our rating, (twice actually), red color so it appears clearly, that 1) we rated it and 2) how much.
vs v3:
Half star (no thanks), not visual (Rate - starts - hearth = ?!), weird location (why at the very botton), white color and orange when mouse hovering. Wtf is this?
Sopherian
Apr 6
Rejected why?!
Shinobi-vs-Gast
Apr 12
Way to listen to your paying customers…
You didn’t even give us a reason why this request is being denied.
ofabiofarias
Mar 5
It would be interesting to update the definitions of each rating. Having the "fair" option at level 6 is too high a rating to be considered weak, isn't it? There are more levels to say that something is bad than good.
ragreynolds
Mar 6
I disagree. Fair is not a bad rating. The only descriptions I didn't like were for 1/10 and 10/10. Weak sauce and totally ninja are not good labels. But yeah, there are not more levels to say something is bad than good. 6-10 are all good. 1-4 are all bad. 5 is neutral.