@THEINCREDIBLEPURP - I think, and I stress this is my own interpretation of @Icculus's post, that a one-star show is something you/me/most fans will most likely never, ever revisit in the future. Sometimes, it is a truly bad show with no highlights anywhere, sometimes it is an otherwise pedestrian and "fine" show with, again, no highlights anywhere. Does it mean those in attendance did not have a good time? Or that we should lambast Phish for such a performance? Or that you suck? Or that Phish sucks? No. It does not mean that.

It means, again in my own interpretation, that when weighed against the totality of era-consistent Phish shows, a one-star show is entirely expected/okay/fine and it will, likely (perhaps advisedly), not be revisited by any number of (a majority of) fans, if only so that they/we can listen to shows that showcase much better examples of their musical prowess.

I, for one, have zero intention of listening to 7.22.16 or 9.3.23 and a handful of other duds I caught live. Did I have fun? Sure, hard to not have fun at a Phish show. Unsure if I actually ranked them or not, but I could not care less if someone chose to rank those shows a one... or a negative 17. Conversely, if someone doesn't think 8.22.15 is a five star show, fuck 'em; I happen to think it is a 39 star show and no arbitrary/loosely-understood/even-more-loosely applied ranking system will change my mind.

I believe the author is reassuring us that that it is okay to be a little more scrupulous with our show ratings (if we even put credence into them in the first place), and, if we do value show ratings, it is advisable to 1. Not take a low rating personally 2. Give high ratings away with caution and 3. Who gives a fuck in the long run - you like what you like, and there is a whole forum, internet, social media, etc dedicated to expressing what we like and do not like in the Phish world.