Imagine the simple process of rating a book you’ve just read.
Let’s say it is a non-fiction. Perhaps a business or even a self-help kind of book.
The normal tendency would be that if it has even an average amount of useful stuff, you’d give it a good rating. Especially if it contained one or more things you weren’t previously aware of. Let’s say you give it a 4 or a 5 out of 5.
Now let’s say not only did it not add any value, it was illogical or nonsensical. Or, to add to that, it wasn’t spellchecked or formatted well. You’d probably give it a 1.
Now for it to be a 2 or 3, it might have been stating the obvious.
Now, as you learn more and more about something, your knowledge about the topic increases dramatically. Which means, when you pick up a book on the topic, there’s a good chance you already know what’s in it. Which means you would either drop the book, or continue reading in the hope there’s something new to learn. Put differently, it would take real veterans to perhaps write about a topic so as to receive a 4 or 5 from you.
So if you do read the book, and you are the critical kind, you might be inclined to rate it average or poorly. And as you might read more books in that field, your general ratings might trend from 5 towards 1.
However, that would be the wrong way to assess a book. Especially if is factual or logical. And has been spellchecked and formatted reasonably well. It might actually be of great help, especially to amateurs in the field.
But imagine if the first few readers are highly intellectual people like yourself. You would all give the book a poor rating. And those amateurs who might have originally benefited from the book, might avoid it thinking. Almost as if assuming it would be a waste of their time.
So, rate wisely.