Encouraging Review

**dk01** · 05-11-2003, 06:10 PM

I am not sure about the quality and frequency at which sites are being reviewed in some of the forums. It seems to me that if people were required to review a few sites before posting their site then it would make the reviews more frequent and not just posted by first-time users. Just a thought.
-dk

**TimSchroeder** · 05-13-2003, 09:33 AM

I think that is a really good idea dko1. Thanks.

I may be putting that rule together shortly.

**DaveMo~** · 05-13-2003, 10:05 AM

That is a good idea.

Of course, there will need to be a couple of stipulations about the reviews that are given. For example, just saying that you like or dislike a site without some reason would not be a review.

Dave

**david** · 05-13-2003, 10:26 AM

I agree that something should be put in place for this. It's far too easy to get a review without ever having to do one yourself. I don't think there should be too many restrictions, though. If there are rules such as 'review should be x words long', 'you must make x LONG reviews' etc. I think the whole area of the boards will just seem far too restricted and it will put people off. Perhaps all review requests could be moderated before posting and all assessed on their own merits, based on the moderators opinion and a set of rough guidlines that all moderators work from, something a bit more informal than set rules....

Just an idea

**DaveMo~** · 05-13-2003, 11:42 AM

Good points, David.

I just had a brain burp, but anyway...y'all must be inspiring!

If one had to do a few reviews before they could ask for a review, then they probably would not do reviews that would be inappropriate (like short answers, or "that sucks", or etc.) They might get reviews like that themselves. It might be enough that if you want a constructive review, give a constructive review. (And that doesn't mean that you have to love the site, and not tell things you don't like - just do it in a nice way!)

Keep those ideas flowing!

Dave

**dk01** · 05-14-2003, 03:06 AM

There will be some people who try and do those reviews that are 10 words long however I bet other people who are regulars and have done long reviews will notice this and take it into consideration. At the moment I find that most people who come to get their site reviewed have only 1 or 2 posts under their belt and afterwards leave the site. Sometimes not even responding to reviews. It seems to me that by forcing them to review a site or two it will discourage one time posters and will keep people coming back even when its not just their site being reviewed. Good ideas here though!
-dk

**DaveMo~** · 05-14-2003, 07:44 PM

Very good points.

So how many reviews does everyone think one should make before requesting a review? 3? 5? More?

One other thought, after making the change to the rules about this, what would you suggest we do with posts for reviews from someone that has not done x amount of reviews? Would we reply that they don't have enough? Delete it? What would you suggest? I don't know if deleting would be good, maybe it should be a canned reply.

Dave

**Criper2000** · 05-14-2003, 08:37 PM

i think thatit sholud be based on 2 things:

1. how many posts they have

2. if they made any quality reviews.

**TimSchroeder** · 05-14-2003, 09:14 PM

Good Discussions.

I would say 2 to 3 reviews would be good.

**dk01** · 05-15-2003, 03:57 AM

3 reviews sounds good to me. I don't think number of post should have anything to do with it but number of reviews should. I think sending them a message in the thread saying that they need to review 3 sites before having theirs reviewed is fine. Sending a PM is bad because then everyone does not see that the person has not followed the rules. If you put a sticky note at the top saying REVIEW RULES - PLEASE READ then it should make it clear enough.
-dk

**david** · 05-15-2003, 05:45 AM

3 sounds like a good number to me. Certainly no more than that anyway.

**TimSchroeder** · 05-15-2003, 10:28 AM

OK, I'm sold on the idea. Great input guys!

However, one other issue.

We have a site review AND site suggestion forum.
So, those that would have normally posted in the site review and see the new rule, will just post in then site suggestion forum instead (to get arond having to review others sites).

So...

Do you still think it is necessary or worthwhile to have split the site review into two topics? Right now, the suggestions forum is for unfinished or finished sites while the other one is for only finished sites (and can be reviewed for the WT award).

Now, obviously we have not had time to keep up with the award system and such, so (at this time) should we temporarily hide/close the award post?

I think we may need to rethink about merging the two forums again. As long as they are reviewing other people sites first, I don't mind someone linking to an unfinished site for input (in the same forum).

Have a confused anyone? Agree, Disagree?

**david** · 05-15-2003, 10:52 AM

Personally I would say:
1. Get rid of the award for now. Once everything's settled down, there's more mods, everyone's happy with the new system it could be reinstated.
2. Merge the two forums. It will make it easier to see whos contributing and who's not and might get rid of some confusion too....

**dk01** · 05-15-2003, 04:38 PM

Yes, merging the two forums together would be a good idea. As for the award, its a good idea in practice but I think that having a limited time period on it is better. So...
1) Merge the site suggestion and review forums
2) Get rid of the award for now (possibly could come back later but in a contests forum or something)
3) I would propose that people only be able to have one review thread at a time on a certain site. This way repeat reviews of sites will not loose the comments from before. Otherwise each time a site has been "updated" people will start a new thread. If they continue their old thread (maybe like up to a month old) then they can build on past comments. It may sound dumb but I think as a reviewer it would make my job easier, and its not too much to ask of people is it?

Anyways it great we are making progress on this. Still listening for other opinions etc

-dk

**DaveMo~** · 05-15-2003, 05:44 PM

I suggest that we keep the two forums separate. Some want suggestions on unfinished sites or sites that are changing. Some want reviews of completed sites and reviews for an award. I think they definitely need to be separate for the time being.

So I think we should keep the two forums, and keep them separate. Merging the two will get us back to the problem of not knowing which is for review and which is for help (even though a review is also for help).

However, the other side of that arguement is that the review forum was set up to help people with their sites. Only if they met a certain criteria by the Admin team did they get an award. The primary purpose of the review forum was not the award, but to help the webmaster.

Until the backlog of reviews are completed, we could leave the review forum open for replies, but not open for new threads. No one could ask for a new review until the backlog is completed. However, they could give reviews of sites that are already listed. Only by keeping it open can we work down the backlog.

After the backlog is completed, we could merge the forums on the basis that we're trying to help each other make a better site. Only when a site excells would an award be considered.

Right now, there can only be one thread per site. If a thread is opened on the same site, it gets deleted. Also, if someone asks for a review and suggestions for the same site, it is deleted (when caught). Hence, they can't get around a review. It does take a lot of work to keep those duplicates down.

It also says in the rules for thread starters to put their site name into the title, and many are not doing that. The choice is to either fix it (which I normally do) or to delete it for the infraction.

Dave

**dk01** · 05-15-2003, 06:37 PM

I see where you are coming from Dave but wouldn't it be a valid argument to say that problems with graphics/design, coding, or anything else should be posted in the respective forums anyways? I mean sure there is reason to say I need general help on the appearence, feel, function, etc of my site but that in effect IS a review. So suggestions and review may be different technically but usually they end up getting the same kind of advice back. I don't think there is a problem with posting reviews for sites which are unfinished or in progress since the only way to improve is to have review. Also, how many of use can say that our sites are "done". I mean each of these sites undergoes countless revision so saving a forum just for "completed" sites is a bit of a technicality. Now as long as what I have said is resonable then it should mean the only true difference is the award. It sounds like a great idea but wouldn't it be better to have an awards forum or something that occurs monthly to select the winner of the award. As of right now it just seems that by having "Site Review" and "site suggestions" it is a bit of a mucked up system. I guess I just invision the current method being a very complicated method for the function of this website.
-dk