Enter your search text in the box above

Select a result to preview

Stellar, Amazing, Basic, & Junk (SABJ) Criteria

Hellos! This is the Stellar, Amazing, Basic, & Junk (SABJ) Criteria, which I'll use to rank websites, software, and other stuff!

About the Criteria

The SABJ Criteria is very simple. It operates on a weighted points-based system. The more points a website/software gets depending on its category, the higher up it goes in ranking. However, for anything to be ranked at all, it must get past the Warden.

Who's the Warden?

You should not be asking "Who", but "What". The Warden is an entity that safeguards the NMOS database, and throws certain stuff into the Junkyard. My Warden acts as the filter, and brings me everything deemed good enough to be ranked above Junk.

Warden's Standards

  • Basic Functionality: Does it fulfill the expected? Is its usage agonizing?
  • Advertisements & Safety: How intrusive are the ads? Are the ads NSFW or malicious? Are the ads completely unmanageable even with adblocker turned on? Does it require you to turn off your adblocker? Is it malicious?
  • Paywall & Privacy: Does the website have an unjustifiable paywall? Does it require you to signup with an account and hand over some of your information? Is there anything privacy-compromising even with proper tools (like VPN)?

Failing one of these standards will get the website/software thrown into the Junkyard, no matter how good it was in other categories, and thus recommended to avoid. There will be a note about what exactly it failed, so you can watch out for it, if you want to try at your own risk.

Weighted Points-based System

After passing the Warden, it's up to me to weigh whether the website/software deserves to be in either Basic, Amazing, or Stellar categories. Each category inspected will be rated out of 5 points. This will require me to be a lot more mindful towards rating, plus, when I have too many points to work with, the rating won't be so accurate.

However, while each category has the same number of points, they do not hold the same weight.

How will it work?

It depends on the website/software category. Some websites' UI/UX will be highly regarded and appreciated, while they're not so needed in others. It's highly variable. Each category inspected will be weighted from 100%, and I'll be deciding the kind of weight each category holds. There is some inaccuracy and subjectivity on how such a category could be important, but with time, this will be improved.

The steps for rating will be as follows:

  1. Rate a category out of 5.
  2. Divide the weight of the category by 5 (while bearing in mind that the maximum points of the category is the weight divided by
  3. That's how many points it got.

How many points each feature gets for each website will be detailed below their respective links along with reasons why. For a small synopsis, there will be small "cards" next to the links, like so:
Feature 1Feature 2Feature 3

Obviously, Feature 1 means this feature is excellent (at least 90% of the maximum score), whereas Feature 2 is mediocre (between 50% and 90%), and Feature 3 is just... no (less than 50%).
#### How many points does each ranking require? Amazing concluding question! > [!info] Minimum Score for Ranking > - S ⇒ Near flawless, you will go "Oh no." if it's down. 85% & more of the maximum overall score. > - A ⇒ Great website, and should give an enjoyable experience. Between 65% and less than 85% of the maximum overall score. > - B ⇒ Gets the job done. Good substitute for the two above. Between 30% and less than 65% of the maximum overall score.

If a website has less than 6 points, I'll be deciding whether to keep it as a Basic website or to throw it into the Junkyard. A website that passes the Warden but fails in almost every aspect doesn't exempt it from being junk.

I know this might sound a little complicated at first, but this is how the criteria works! You don't actually need to know all this, but if you wanted to... well, here! This page is very subject to changes in the near future. :)