I imagine many people include the star rating as part of their criteria when choosing a woman, but that rating is mechanically calculated from the feedback survey after a date, right?

I’m on the night shift, but there aren’t any questions today, so I’m posting this here instead. Well, let’s just treat it as me getting home in the morning. As for the star ratings, I think they’re fairly reliable. As you pointed out, the key is that they’re calculated mechanically from “survey ratings = ratings from members who actually met her.” In other words, there’s no room for staff bias, and since each rating is made up of multiple members’ feedback, it doesn’t depend on any one person’s opinion. They can’t be manipulated with fake reviews like on Amazon, either. They were also tested before implementation to verify that they produced reasonable ratings. I think it’s actually a pretty well-designed feature. That said, it’s also important to think about what these ratings represent. You can only rate something because there’s a scale, and if you use a different yardstick, you’ll get a different evaluation. So what is the yardstick for these star ratings? It’s a woman’s contribution to the dating club’s services—in other words, someone who receives lots of offers and consistently gets good reviews from the men she meets. It may be easier to understand if you think of it as working like Mercari ratings or Uber driver ratings. Each individual rating ranges from +2 to -2, and a five-star woman has a score of +7 or higher. So if she has five stars, she’s met at least four men. Since she probably has more +1 ratings than +2 ratings, the actual number of men is likely several more than that. If she’s a Type C or B2 in terms of the relationship category, I’m sure you can imagine what that means. Since multiple relationships are implicitly assumed in dating clubs, this is exactly the right yardstick for “savvy” male members who don’t worry about that sort of thing and are simply happy as long as she’s attractive and enjoyable to be with when she meets them. On the other hand, there are probably male members who want her to be close only with them, or who feel uneasy about the presence of other men. I don’t deny that at all—I’m the same way—but for people like us, these ratings aren’t something to take at face value. The scale is different, after all. So those men might be better off avoiding women with high star ratings. I’m also a little put off by women with very high ratings. Of course, a low rating doesn’t automatically mean she’s a good choice either. It’s not that I’m looking for high-risk situations. Rather, I consider whether I’m capable of overcoming that risk myself. If these ratings make you feel uneasy, I think you and I are cut from the same cloth, so let me put it this way: You want to be King Arthur pulling Excalibur from the stone, right? Then you understand that if everything is set up for you, it doesn’t exactly make you a hero. So stop complaining and make the effort yourself—think for yourself and take action yourself! Babanba-ban-ban-ban♪ (lol) Taro

If that’s the argument, wouldn’t all online ratings be the same? Things like Tabelog and Google Maps—you’re free to decide whether or not to use them as a reference. Personally, I make offers to women with four-star ratings. Women with a steady five-star rating probably get lots of offers, which means there are likely plenty of rival papas (male supporters). But three stars is just the default, so you might end up meeting a person to avoid. With four stars, at least a few people have rated her positively, so it feels a little safer. I figure she probably isn’t a person to avoid, haha.

Thanks for the question. Maezawa here as well. > If the ratings are calculated based on this, I don’t think they’re very reliable. What do you think? If more than 50% of them were like that, I agree they wouldn’t be reliable. However, I think only a very small percentage are unreliable at the moment. For example, even if 1% of all the feedback were unreliable, the remaining 99% would still be reliable. So overall, I think the ratings can be considered generally trustworthy. That said, I haven’t measured what percentage is actually unreliable. Personally, I’ve always wondered how reliable star ratings in general really are, so even if I were a member, I probably wouldn’t pay much attention to them. I might even deliberately make an offer to someone with just one star. If the only reason her rating is low is because the rating itself is unreliable, she might actually be a great woman once you meet her. Or perhaps she simply happens to be someone I’m especially compatible with. When you think of her as a potential diamond in the rough, doesn’t that make you want to reach out? Of course, the profile is what matters most. But if I like a woman’s profile and her rating is low, I might think, “This could be an opportunity.” Incidentally, until just five or six years ago, there were hardly any criteria for raising someone’s star rating. There were criteria for lowering it, such as being late or canceling at the last minute, but there was also a period when almost every woman had three stars. Later, criteria for raising ratings were introduced, including things like responding quickly to staff. But what exactly counts as “quickly”—within how many minutes? And it varied depending on how each staff member interpreted it. As a result, some women’s ratings went up while others’ didn’t, even when they responded equally quickly. There was a time when people questioned how fair those ratings really were. Considering that history, I feel the current automated ratings are at least fairer. However, there’s also the issue that if a man was great on the first date but failed to pay the allowance or unilaterally lowered the amount on the second date, you can’t necessarily give him a bad rating. So I do think there’s still room for improvement.

I use the number of ⭐︎s as a rough reference. Girls with lots of stars may have good personalities, but they also tend to receive many offers—and if they’re C-type or above, they’re often less likely to turn someone down for a first meeting. For example, I avoid girls whose ratings go up and down, interpreting that as them being more demanding because they get a lot of offers. On the other hand, girls whose ratings stay consistently high seem to have a lot of competition, but are generally approachable. If you want to judge someone’s personality, I’d rely more on the staff’s recommended impression rating than on member reviews, which can be all over the place.

Since only a small number of people leave those kinds of noise reviews, I don’t think they have much impact on the overall star rating. I seem to remember that this was also explained when the system changed. That said, if you still feel star ratings can’t be trusted, you can simply ignore them personally.