Phish.net is a non-commercial project run by Phish fans and for Phish fans under the auspices of the all-volunteer, non-profit Mockingbird Foundation.
This project serves to compile, preserve, and protect encyclopedic information about Phish and their music.
Credits | Terms Of Use | Legal | DMCA
The Mockingbird Foundation is a non-profit organization founded by Phish fans in 1996 to generate charitable proceeds from the Phish community.
And since we're entirely volunteer – with no office, salaries, or paid staff – administrative costs are less than 2% of revenues! So far, we've distributed over $2 million to support music education for children – hundreds of grants in all 50 states, with more on the way.
And with a wisdom of the crowds approach it's even harder. Everyone who rates has to have a relatively similar rating framework in their head to make it work - and that's based on experience, past ratings systems and expectations. I appreciate the 1-5 model laid out. Alas, it's fundamentally unworkable due to human nature and how rating systems have trained us.
Think of wine. They mostly do a 100-point scale (which is fundamentally stupid to me, as a 3 to 5 point scale is best, or 9 if you do half points), but go with me. A wine scored as 70 is essentially undrinkable, which puts most wines in the 85-95 range. Or in our vernacular, 3.5 to 4.5.
So a better range for this group might be that. Outliers - ie really good and really bad, go above and below the 3.5 to 4.5 range, while most shows live in the middle.
Luckily - except for an outcast handful (see 10/26/85) - we don't have "paid" reviewers artificially inflating ratings.
I was also at all 4 Dicks shows, which gives me context on what Icculus laid out. I think a more rational - given my shared touchpoints above - would be that Thursday was a 3.7 or so, Friday was more of a 4.2 or 4.3 and Saturday a 4.6. Sunday probably comes in at 3.5. Drinkable, but I'm not buying a case.
But it's also worthwhile to think through what people actually do with ratings. I use them to figure out what shows I should watch/listen to/focus on. I can (and try to) listen to every show, but it helps to have context for when there's just too much to listen to and too little time. Others use them for social validation (I was at that show? You were at that show. It was the BEST!).
Give me the top 10 for a year anytime, though, because that can guide my re-listening pleasure.
Or instead, give me an expert curator, like DAAM, or Osiris or someone else, and let them guide me.
it's fun to go to a show you loved, and then see everyone else praising it too. It's also fun to go to a show (like Friday Dicks) where the review is markedly different from your experience. First takes are hard. But also helpful. And I have mad respect for anyone who lays out their first look within hours of being there. That's not easy and much appreciated.
In conclusion, I love what Icculus laid out. But alas it is fundamentally unworkable. History, expectations and training will all conspire to push is into a narrow band with outliers. But that's not necessarily bad.