Nu-Q

[Rose]

So should I only post one review for my week, or can I still post 2-3 while we sort out this new system?

[aids]

So should I only post one review for my week, or can I still post 2-3 while we sort out this new system?

Nah, one will be enough.

[Nexx]

So should I only post one review for my week, or can I still post 2-3 while we sort out this new system?

Nah, one will be enough.

And that's the core issue all over again: why restrict reviews so much when reviewers are willing to post more often?

If you're strongly opposed to multiple reviews in a week by the same reviewer, then let's try a 3- or 4- or 5-day system or something. :)

I'm not trying to tread on toes, this just seems a bit off.

[Rose]

So should I only post one review for my week, or can I still post 2-3 while we sort out this new system?

Nah, one will be enough.

And that's the core issue all over again: why restrict reviews so much when reviewers are willing to post more often?

If you're strongly opposed to multiple reviews in a week by the same reviewer, then let's try a 3- or 4- or 5-day system or something. :)

I'm not trying to tread on toes, this just seems a bit off.

I'll just submit one for now, but I have to agree with Nexx. There simply aren't enough features right now and I want to help fix that. I understand that in the past, it was frowned upon for the same reviewer to post multiple reviews in a row. But times have changed, and we need all the activity we can get.

[aids]

I guess I didn't make myself clear. I would like to have a seven-day system, but only if you guys are prepared to post daily features. Otherwise it will fall apart again.

[Sunset]

I guess I didn't make myself clear. I would like to have a seven-day system, but only if you guys are prepared to post daily features. Otherwise it will fall apart again.

I'm willing to work around a 3-day system, but:
- One review per three days?
- Between one and three for your three days?
- Does the current system work?
- Does this just complicate the reviewer system more?
- ????????????????????????????????????????????

Like I said, I'm willing. I'm also able. But is it *WORTH* going through the fuss of it? As I've seen so far only 3 reviewers out of 15, so 1/5th are saying it's a better system than the current for [reason]. I'm not implying a majority split vote would be a better way to handle this, or even that it's a way *TO* handle this, but I'm not willing to change an entire system that works currently, or appears to work, for [opinion]. That's not to say that you can't argue it, but I can't only listen to a less than quarter percent of the reviewer population and disregard the entirety of the other seventy-five+. Shit don't work.

[zoasBE]

I agree totally with you two Rose and Nexx. I can easily remember when I was criticized by posting reviews in row, but also when I was the only one posting them and interested in doing it. Although I really prefer the daily system, I think this weekly one is apparently the system that works now. Why to cut the wings of the reviewers when they are interested in publishing several reviews on their own week? It seems incongruous and counterproductive.
I can also remember very easily when turtles returned and presented 4 or 5 consecutive reviews, all of which were impressive to read. Like the last three by Nexx. Honestly I think we are who make something that could be really easy and fun, something complicated. I think we are the ones that create the problems and put their own fetters. We should not complicate the life so ourselves.

All of us have more than 2 years without reading a Rose's review, really matter that he post three in a row? I think it can be very interesting to read those three. Come on guys, let's not be so complicated.

[Rose]

I guess I didn't make myself clear. I would like to have a seven-day system, but only if you guys are prepared to post daily features. Otherwise it will fall apart again.

I'm not pushing for a daily system at all.

Okay, here are two possibilities I see, both of which should be perfectly feasible:

Option 1: We keep the weekly system we have, but allow each reviewer to post 2-3 reviews during their week.

Option 2: We move to a system where we assign a review date every three days. So on Feb 1 someone reviews, then someone else does on the 4th, then someone else on the 7th, etc.

Either way, we get a new feature every few days, which is a nice happy medium between weekly and daily. Daily isn't sustainable, but weekly isn't enough. We need more activity, and I don't care whether it's by option 1 or 2. Just... not one review a week, please.

[Sunset]

I guess I didn't make myself clear. I would like to have a seven-day system, but only if you guys are prepared to post daily features. Otherwise it will fall apart again.

I'm not pushing for a daily system at all.

Okay, here are two possibilities I see, both of which should be perfectly feasible:

Option 1: We keep the weekly system we have, but allow each reviewer to post 2-3 reviews during their week.

Option 2: We move to a system where we assign a review date every three days. So on Feb 1 someone reviews, then someone else does on the 4th, then someone else on the 7th, etc.

Either way, we get a new feature every few days, which is a nice happy medium between weekly and daily. Daily isn't sustainable, but weekly isn't enough. We need more activity, and I don't care whether it's by option 1 or 2. Just... not one review a week, please.

Well... You can already post more than one review per week.

[zoasBE]

Also, I'll pick the week of Mar 16th. Thanks.

[aids]

I /reaaaaally/ would like to not have one person feature several maps in a row. But, given the circumstances, I guess if we went the weekly route then two reviews by that person would be acceptable. I'll let you decide amongst yourselves what to do. And be on the lookout for new reviewers.

[Nexx]

Well... You can already post more than one review per week.

As Aidiera reiterated above, he strongly doesn't want that. That's why there's been a burst of posts in this thread.

Like I said, I'm willing. I'm also able. But is it *WORTH* going through the fuss of it? As I've seen so far only 3 reviewers out of 15, so 1/5th are saying it's a better system than the current for [reason]. I'm not implying a majority split vote would be a better way to handle this, or even that it's a way *TO* handle this, but I'm not willing to change an entire system that works currently, or appears to work, for [opinion]. That's not to say that you can't argue it, but I can't only listen to a less than quarter percent of the reviewer population and disregard the entirety of the other seventy-five+. Shit don't work.

This seems like a false argument because the system was changed from 1-day to 7-days without polling the reviewer population.

But anyway, zoas is right, this isn't complicated. You just have to look at # of reviewers willing to post vs # of spots available.

Right now, we've knocked the number of available review spots way down, so that the system works. A working system is good, but it seems like we have significantly fewer available spots than we have reviewers willing to post. The lack of available spots is *slowing down* the posting of reviews.

We're proposing a 3-day or 4-day system in an effort to better balance out the two sides.

Oh and changing the system isn't going to break it. Eventually, when the # of reviewers willing to post dries up even more, we can again decrease the # of spots to match, so that the system is balanced as practically as possible.

But right now, 7-day intervals are too long, and it's slowing down reviews. Simple.

[zoasBE]

Quite right Nexx. I vote for a 3-day system and for a commited reviewers team. I honestly think that this should be decided under popular decision, ultimately, on the decision of the reviewers themselves, that who are the ones who are making possible this to go forward.

Also,

I /reaaaaally/ would like to not have one person feature several maps in a row. But, given the circumstances, I guess if we went the weekly route then two reviews by that person would be acceptable. I'll let you decide amongst yourselves what to do. And be on the lookout for new reviewers.

That sounds intimidatory.
EDIT: Well, perhaps not that much, and may be my lack of understanding when a non-native language.

[aids]

I'm just saying that I won't stop you for posting more than one review in a row; you'll just make me sad.

[sidke]

you'll just make me sad.

how... how sad would it make you?

[zoasBE]

I'm just saying that I won't stop you for posting more than one review in a row; you'll just make me sad.

Don't get sad, my friend Aidiera. Your chances of getting a map featured increase considerably with a 3-day system more than 4 reviews per month. You'll should be happy.

[Sunset]

Well... You can already post more than one review per week.

As Aidiera reiterated above, he strongly doesn't want that. That's why there's been a burst of posts in this thread.

Like I said, I'm willing. I'm also able. But is it *WORTH* going through the fuss of it? As I've seen so far only 3 reviewers out of 15, so 1/5th are saying it's a better system than the current for [reason]. I'm not implying a majority split vote would be a better way to handle this, or even that it's a way *TO* handle this, but I'm not willing to change an entire system that works currently, or appears to work, for [opinion]. That's not to say that you can't argue it, but I can't only listen to a less than quarter percent of the reviewer population and disregard the entirety of the other seventy-five+. Shit don't work.

This seems like a false argument because the system was changed from 1-day to 7-days without polling the reviewer population.

But anyway, zoas is right, this isn't complicated. You just have to look at # of reviewers willing to post vs # of spots available.

Right now, we've knocked the number of available review spots way down, so that the system works. A working system is good, but it seems like we have significantly fewer available spots than we have reviewers willing to post. The lack of available spots is *slowing down* the posting of reviews.

We're proposing a 3-day or 4-day system in an effort to better balance out the two sides.

Oh and changing the system isn't going to break it. Eventually, when the # of reviewers willing to post dries up even more, we can again decrease the # of spots to match, so that the system is balanced as practically as possible.

But right now, 7-day intervals are too long, and it's slowing down reviews. Simple.

True, though it's not like before the reviewers were necessarily coherent in their choice of reviews. Part of the point of this new system was to bring back a working system for the review system. And that does seem to have worked, however slow it may be right now. If anything the system is and should be temporary. I'll try to work around a 3-4 day system, though I'd need to give it some thought. And a lot of time.

[aids]

I'd be pretty disappointed. Also, like I said, if we only have four active reviewers, then it would make the most sense to give them each a week to review two or three maps. Oh, and I try not to care about getting featured. There are more important things, like running a kind, caring community.

[Rose]

For the record, if we're still doing it by week, I'll take Feb 23.

[Can]

I cannot take Feb. 16, since I'll be in Spain the whole week. I'll push for the next available slot, or if a reviewer wants to switch spots with me? (maybe Rose switch with me? post here if that's okay)

[Sunset]

I cannot take Feb. 16, since I'll be in Spain the whole week. I'll push for the next available slot, or if a reviewer wants to switch spots with me? (maybe Rose switch with me? post here if that's okay)

Switched you with me.

[zoasBE]

I cannot take Feb. 16, since I'll be in Spain the whole week. I'll push for the next available slot, or if a reviewer wants to switch spots with me? (maybe Rose switch with me? post here if that's okay)

You said Spain? Wow!
Por casualidad tu no vendrás a Madrid?

[Can]

I cannot take Feb. 16, since I'll be in Spain the whole week. I'll push for the next available slot, or if a reviewer wants to switch spots with me? (maybe Rose switch with me? post here if that's okay)

You said Spain? Wow!
Por casualidad tu no vendrás a Madrid?

No hablo Espanol muy bueno :)

It has been 2 years since I last studied Spanish, and since I never really got to use it it fell out of use (and I'm studying 4 other languages so those have been taking my focus haha). Anyways, we're going to Galicia, the Atlantic Coast. I'm looking forward to getting out of the grimness of Finland :D

[zoasBE]

I cannot take Feb. 16, since I'll be in Spain the whole week. I'll push for the next available slot, or if a reviewer wants to switch spots with me? (maybe Rose switch with me? post here if that's okay)

You said Spain? Wow!
Por casualidad tu no vendrás a Madrid?

No hablo Espanol muy bueno :)

It has been 2 years since I last studied Spanish, and since I never really got to use it it fell out of use (and I'm studying 4 other languages so those have been taking my focus haha). Anyways, we're going to Galicia, the Atlantic Coast. I'm looking forward to getting out of the grimness of Finland :D

Only you will go to Galicia?
Then I think it will be very complicated we meet, I'm in Madrid, more than 600 kilometers away.

[Nexx]

Well, Sunset, seeing as how we're already coming to our first potential review gap, it appears you were right to limit reviews!

Grabbing March 9th