>For those of you that look at IMDb ratings,

Here is the first problem: People really shouldn't be looking at these ratings. People just do it out of habit or reflex, and never really stop to think what these ratings represent, or if they're even remotely reflective of the people who are watching the show.

So even before you get to the part where viewer-submitted ratings are suspect from jump precisely because of how they've become the first stop for the lazy malcontent who wants to feel like a culture war activist without even having the courage of their own convictions (which they likely just stole from the comments section of a YouTube grifter's rage channel anyway)....

User-submitted ratings are only ever representative of what a extremely tiny self-selecting minority of the general audience presumably thinks. So even if every single one of those ratings being collected for their average actually was created in good faith (and as you and I both know, they routinely are not, it is part of the online grift cycle now, permanently) you're still looking at a rating that almost solely represents the views of 18-49 year old men who would even bother leaving a rating after watching something in the first place.

For whatever reason, people just accept this collection of ratings as a useful representation despite the fact it's anything but, and never has been. It's wild how people will thoughlessly accept that these numbers are trustworthy for no other reason than they're on imdb, despite knowing without a doubt that the only people actually contributing to these numbers are an extremely limited volunteer sampling of an extremely narrow-focused demo, many of whom are only there because they mistakenly believe the registering of their bad opinion counts as political activism in any way.

TL:DR - review bombing isn't a problem if everyone stops acting like those numbers have inherent worth in the first place, because they don't.