A frequent, though, by no means the most frequent, contributor to a satirical news website, has said he was interested to note that a reader of one of his stories had awarded it a 3-star rating today, which was thought-provoking.
Moys Kenwood, 57, wrote a story, this morning, which related how, in his youth as a punk rocker, he and his friends would call the scooter that a local Mod used to ride, a 'Puff Chariot'.
The story attracted a few readers, but not too many. One of these, however, had decided to award it three stars.
"This provoked me to 'thought,'" said Kenwood.
Usually, if a person thinks a story is funny, or clever, that person will award the story a 5-star rating.
If, however, the story is perceived by its reader to be awful, terrible, not having been worth the time and effort expended to write it, or just plain dogshit, no rating at all would be given.
If a story really and truly gets on someone's tits, they can award it a 1-star rating, which, although it results in the story being awarded one point, is seen as a way of conveying to the author a sense of the reader's disgust.
A 3-star rating, though, is a bit mysterious, and certainly trickier to pin down.
The reader may have liked the concept, but not the fact that the writer had been a punk.
The reader may not have liked the concept, but was so impressed by the quality of the writing, that it was felt the writer deserved some kind of recognition for his efforts.
It could have been a mistaken rating.
There may have been an earthquake.
Could it possibly have been that the reader, like the writer, thought that scooters were a rather effeminate way of getting from A to B, but wasn't prepared to back this up with a 5-star rating, because he or she suffered, like Jimmy Walton, from a face covered in zits?
"Or," said Kenwood, "the reader may have owned a Puff Chariot."