I found his discussion of how he views matches today fascinating. It's pretty clear that he operates in the wrestling bubble when it comes to match criticism and doesn't read a ton of critical analysis for books, TV shows, films, video games, etc. If he had been using a __/10 scale since the beginning and gave a match an 11, I don't think people would bat an eye. But because he used the five star scale for 36 years, which is about half of the time that pro wrestling has been accessible to a wide audience (I'm using 1950 as the year - I know we can go back to 1905 or some other date), he's essentially relied on the same system for the half life of pro wrestling in the US/Japan.
Ultimately, I rate matches so I can compare, list, and sequence what I think is great, very good, average, etc. Dave's professional life is worked pro wrestling and UFC. You rarely see ratings thrown around for sporting events. I usually just list when I'm doing something with baseball like the top 10 Orioles live games of 2012.
But I also have star ratings for MMA fights because I see it as a compliment to pro wrestling in that I know what I like, I know what I don't like, and am willing to go back and review periodically to see where my current opinion lives with my past opinions. The ***** classics like Rumina Sato vs. Caol Uno or Fedor vs. Nog I still stand firm, just like Misawa/Kawada 6/3/94.
I'd be interested in hearing what Dave would say about Amazon reviews. It's a five star scale and if someone really, really likes a product, they give it five stars and back it up with a thorough review. If Amazon just started saying you can rate this out of an infinite scale, it would become useless. Dave's scale isn't useless for everyone but it's less and less of a resource as time goes by.