Bestcommentaries.com Datastet
Here is a thought I had this morning. What if there was a Logos dataset containing the ratings used on bestcommentaries.com? There are several ways this data could be used, and I am sure others might be able to further refine or add to my ideas.
1. A library option to automatically prioritize commentaries based on the ratings.
2. An interactive tool in Logos that shows which commentaries that have been rated and are available in Logos are owned and which ones are not (might help Faithlife sell more books).
3. Perhaps this information could somehow be integrated into the Logos website. For example, the page for the Word Biblical Commentary (since it is currently on sale) might show how many volumes from the series hold a number 1 ranking, top 5 ranking, etc. (again, might help Faithlife sell more books).
Comments
-
4. It might help keep any top rated books that are not yet available in Logos on Faithlife's radar to add in the future
0 -
'Best'?
I think an evangelical seal of approval might work. Kind of like what the Catholics have. Smiling.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Denise said:
'Best'?
Yes, "best." Commentariesthataregenerallyheldtobeofahigherqualityandperhapsmorehelpfulthanothercommentaries.com takes too long to type. [:P]
In all seriousness, yes, I get your point and was expecting someone to say something along those lines before I ever made my initial post. Obviously "best" is a subjective term and no ranking system will ever be perfect. However, that particular website and its ranking system are more widely used than any other (as far as I know, at least) and Faithlife apparently thinks enough people put enough stock in the ranking system that it has been used by Faithlife as the basis of promotional sales. It seems it would be a logical starting point, and if additional systems could be incorporated in the future I would be very open that.
Denise said:I think an evangelical seal of approval might work. Kind of like what the Catholics have. Smiling.
I think the characterization of the website as Evangelical is somewhat of an exaggeration. I would point out that Catholic authors and series are in fact included, but I would also grant the counterpoint that those same authors and series would likely receive a higher rating by someone with a Catholic perspective rather than an Evangelical one. Everyone's "best" list will be different, and obviously Evangelical vs. Catholic is a false dichotomy to begin with.
In a perfect world, I could read every single commentary out there and decide for myself which ones are more useful. Since I do not have the time or money to do that, I necessarily rely on the opinions of others to give me at least a starting point for which commentaries I should spend my limited resources on. I am not so much interested in knowing that Group X approves of Commentary Y as I am knowing which authors do a good job of exploring the relevant data, explaining the various ways in which that data has been interpreted, selecting a particular interpretation, and defending their choice. An author who does that is an author I am willing to take a look at regardless of the author's religious perspective or what seals of approve they may have.
0 -
Denise said:
I think an evangelical seal of approval might work. Kind of like what the Catholics have. Smiling.
Okay. "papal seal of approval dataset" then, for discovering and researching everything that Catholics are supposed to believe.
0 -
Have you checked out https://www.logos.com/guides ? Best-of for each book of the Bible [Y]
0 -
Matthew said:
I think the characterization of the website as Evangelical is somewhat of an exaggeration.
Well, when they think Concise HALOT is a better choice than DCH, we're definitely in loosey-goosey territory. Or Kitchen for archaeology. Like I say, it looks like a Betty Crocker thing.
I can see Logos.com offering BC assistance, but I'd hate to see the software being cludged up.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Is there a potential though for publishers to push back on FL promoting such a system? It could be seen in a negative light when it comes to sets and volumes that are not as highly regarded from a publishers standpoint.
The other thing to consider is that this would not be a static dataset but dynamic. Ratings change and new volumes are release. How often do you expect FL to update the dataset?
And as Denise has alluded to not all users will necessarily agree with the subjective rankings of the site. So FL would need to build in code to make use of the dataset optional.
And finally it might hurt FL sales in longer term if users stop purchasing certain commentaries based on this subjective rating.
Just some thoughts from the other side of the idea.
Matthew said:Here is a thought I had this morning. What if there was a Logos dataset containing the ratings used on bestcommentaries.com? There are several ways this data could be used, and I am sure others might be able to further refine or add to my ideas.
1. A library option to automatically prioritize commentaries based on the ratings.
2. An interactive tool in Logos that shows which commentaries that have been rated and are available in Logos are owned and which ones are not (might help Faithlife sell more books).
3. Perhaps this information could somehow be integrated into the Logos website. For example, the page for the Word Biblical Commentary (since it is currently on sale) might show how many volumes from the series hold a number 1 ranking, top 5 ranking, etc. (again, might help Faithlife sell more books).
0
