I would agree with mako river - this work-in-progress has the looks of a great article! However, with the article as-is, I would disagree with your argument "Abandonia's own public rating system is worthless because
the biggest gems receive the same score as
the mediocre scum. [I substituted
c^%$ with
scum to make it less potentially-offensive]"
The main gripe I have with this argument at this point is its excessive relativism - without an idea of what you consider hidden gems and mediocre scum, you're gonna get a lot of angry e-mails saying how X game is a gem and Y game is scum, and neither of them got the same rating as you suggested in your article than if you had given your audience a clearer picture.
Also, even if did follow my advice above, a thoughtful reader could see your argument as begging the following question: How many people actually voted on those games? If the numbers are high enough (assuming you're using the mathmatical formula of (A+B+C+...)/X, with A, B, C representing votes, ... representing potentially many more votes, and X representing the total number of votes), the votes will, given a sufficient mix of high and low votes, even out around 3.0 since 3 is the median for the number range 1-5.
In the case of potentially-hidden gaming gems, for example,
Railroad Tycoon has a rating of 3.9/5.0 based on the average 5,763 votes; however,
Transport Tycoon Deluxe - arguably the best version of Transport Tycoon - has the same rating, but its average is based on 15,934 votes.
In the case of genuine garbage (relatively based, in this case, on my agreement with an Abandonia reviewer's game rating of 2.0 or 1.0), for example,
Barbarian has a rating of 3.2 based on the average of 1,415 votes; however, Pole Position has the same rating based on the average of
10 votes.
I hope this long diatribe wasn't excessively filled with complicated words, red_avatar, and I hope that my opinion was helpful in some way.