Change to Review System

[zoasBE]

In response to Zoas: I am your mother.

I don't think so, my mother makes much better maps than you.

[Leonidas]

Also, google chrome does do spell check, but, unfortunately, only cool people use chrome.
And there aren't many cool people left in the world.

Hahahaha XD

[Scrivener]

Having mandatory proofreaders as a staff position is unnecessary. Anyone who can't be trusted to submit properly proofread reviews—checked by someone else first if they do not feel confident in their own proofreading—absolutely should not be posting reviews.

Okay. Yep. We are done with this discussion because maestro is right. I am going to start getting rid of people who make too many typos, the end.

ceteris paribus

I guess the whole problem was that we didn't have enough people to make killing off half the reviewers a good idea? Anyway, I'm game to take some looming dates if the claimants to said dates are dispatched.

[Sunset]

Having mandatory proofreaders as a staff position is unnecessary. Anyone who can't be trusted to submit properly proofread reviews—checked by someone else first if they do not feel confident in their own proofreading—absolutely should not be posting reviews.

Okay. Yep. We are done with this discussion because maestro is right. I am going to start getting rid of people who make too many typos, the end.

ceteris paribus

And the oligarchy begins

Unrelated, but I can't tell if you having my quote as your sig is necessarily a good thing.

On-topic, disagree with maestro. The review might be good itself, but the grammar less-than-good - does that mean it should get docked, simply because there are a few grammatical errors? I don't think so. But there are those that would disagree, you being one of them.

[乳头的早餐谷物]

On-topic, disagree with maestro. The review might be good itself, but the grammar less-than-good - does that mean it should get docked, simply because there are a few grammatical errors? I don't think so. But there are those that would disagree, you being one of them.

What it means is that person needs to take more care with their work or enlisting someone else to help. If someone does a review that is good but has some errors in it, let them know that and tell them that if they aren't confident of fixing these things themselves in the future they should give their reviews to someone else to check over first. That's fine. I'm not advocating a zero-tolerance approach.

[ska]

Have to say.. I am also in complete agreement with maestro. Spelling errors are completely unforgivable, period. My process goes -> Play the map -> shortlist the map if it qualifies for your personal standard of what a map worthy of being reviewed is -> Write a draft review -> Proofread it to make sure it flows, makes sense and has correct spelling and grammar -> (optional but recommended - a must for people who don't have a strong command of the English language) send to at least one other person to read through and check for mistakes or suggestions -> Submit review on correct day, ensuring adequate amount of time from last review.

[Sunset]

On-topic, disagree with maestro. The review might be good itself, but the grammar less-than-good - does that mean it should get docked, simply because there are a few grammatical errors? I don't think so. But there are those that would disagree, you being one of them.

What it means is that person needs to take more care with their work or enlisting someone else to help. If someone does a review that is good but has some errors in it, let them know that and tell them that if they aren't confident of fixing these things themselves in the future they should give their reviews to someone else to check over first. That's fine. I'm not advocating a zero-tolerance approach.

I see what you mean now. Misunderstood.

[TommyWiseau24]

And the oligarchy begins

If by "oligarchy" you mean "top-down organizational society that exists in many democratic schemas whenever the issue is not important enough to warrant a cumbersome democratic system", yes.

Agree with maestro, along with reviewers with no thought in their works.

[Scrivener]

Have to say.. I am also in complete agreement with maestro. Spelling errors are completely unforgivable, period. My process goes -> Play the map -> shortlist the map if it qualifies for your personal standard of what a map worthy of being reviewed is -> Write a draft review -> Proofread it to make sure it flows, makes sense and has correct spelling and grammar -> (optional but recommended - a must for people who don't have a strong command of the English language) send to at least one other person to read through and check for mistakes or suggestions -> Submit review on correct day, ensuring adequate amount of time from last review.

I thought this was going to go something like -> See a featured map -> Go to the map and play it -> Enjoy the map -> Read the review and find a single spelling error -> Begin to hate the map -> Continue to hate the map, the review, life, etc

[runningninja]

Have to say.. I am also in complete agreement with maestro. Spelling errors are completely unforgivable, period. My process goes -> Play the map -> shortlist the map if it qualifies for your personal standard of what a map worthy of being reviewed is -> Write a draft review -> Proofread it to make sure it flows, makes sense and has correct spelling and grammar -> (optional but recommended - a must for people who don't have a strong command of the English language) send to at least one other person to read through and check for mistakes or suggestions -> Submit review on correct day, ensuring adequate amount of time from last review.

I thought this was going to go something like -> See a featured map -> Go to the map and play it -> Enjoy the map -> Read the review and find a single spelling error -> Begin to hate the map -> Continue to hate the map, the review, life, etc

I believe spelling errors are being trivialized. Professionalism is crucial to the appearance of metanet.

[lord_day]

Professionalism is crucial to the appearance of metanet.

Is it?

[乳头的早餐谷物]

Professionalism is crucial to the appearance of metanet.

Is it?

I don't know about professionalism per se, but not looking completely stupid certainly helps.

[aids]

All this energy could be put to better use in writing high-quality reviews for the Admin to use. "Be the change" and such.

[lfaber]

I do agree that the reviewing system should be changed, but all of your suggestions, although good, have flaws as far as I can see. I personally think that the current system is really the best thing that there can be; it makes it so that the reviews and maps are always original and different because the reviewers change each day. The only flaw that was mentioned with the current system, and the only one that I can see, is that there aren't enough participating reviewers. What I think really needs to happen is to find a way to promote people to review or review more often. When thinking about this, I wondered what makes people submit actual maps. Why are we so motivated to submit them? I assume that it's because the maps are rated, and we get a sense of pleasure when we see our maps doing well. This is why I think that we need to add a rating for the reviews themselves. In addition, maybe there should be something like a "reviewer rating" displayed on your profile that decreases with shitty reviews and missed reviews, and increases with good ratings. This would help motivate people to review more often, be more punctual about their reviewing, and also cause more people to become good reviewers.

Please tell me if this is plausible.

[Leonidas]

I do agree that the reviewing system should be changed, but all of your suggestions, although good, have flaws as far as I can see. I personally think that the current system is really the best thing that there can be; it makes it so that the reviews and maps are always original and different because the reviewers change each day. The only flaw that was mentioned with the current system, and the only one that I can see, is that there aren't enough participating reviewers. What I think really needs to happen is to find a way to promote people to review or review more often. When thinking about this, I wondered what makes people submit actual maps. Why are we so motivated to submit them? I assume that it's because the maps are rated, and we get a sense of pleasure when we see our maps doing well. This is why I think that we need to add a rating for the reviews themselves. In addition, maybe there should be something like a "reviewer rating" displayed on your profile that decreases with shitty reviews and missed reviews, and increases with good ratings. This would help motivate people to review more often, be more punctual about their reviewing, and also cause more people to become good reviewers.

Please tell me if this is plausible.

Sounds good. But I don't think flag can mess around with any new physical stuff on the website, I think only arachnid can do stuff like that :/

[Traveleravi]

What if there was a thread where anyone could submit a review and a link to a map and then the people who are reviewers could choose one of the already written reviews, and cite the person who wrote it. This way there would be more people writing reviews, reviewers still exist for quality control, and reviewers who are "lazy" or "busy" can still have a featured map once a week. Everybody wins.

[Universezero]

What if there was a thread where anyone could submit a review and a link to a map and then the people who are reviewers could choose one of the already written reviews, and cite the person who wrote it. This way there would be more people writing reviews, reviewers still exist for quality control, and reviewers who are "lazy" or "busy" can still have a featured map once a week. Everybody wins.

QFE

[aids]

Creature Feature failed because nobody's submitting reviews anymore.

[otters~1]

What if there was a thread where anyone could submit a review and a link to a map and then the people who are reviewers could choose one of the already written reviews, and cite the person who wrote it. This way there would be more people writing reviews, reviewers still exist for quality control, and reviewers who are "lazy" or "busy" can still have a featured map once a week. Everybody wins.

hahaha

[Traveleravi]

What if there was a thread where anyone could submit a review and a link to a map and then the people who are reviewers could choose one of the already written reviews, and cite the person who wrote it. This way there would be more people writing reviews, reviewers still exist for quality control, and reviewers who are "lazy" or "busy" can still have a featured map once a week. Everybody wins.

hahaha

Why is this funny? Perhaps there is something I am missing...

[Pheidippides]

Your hypothetical thread where anyone can submit a review already exists, and has existed for a long time. It's called Creature Feature.

[Traveleravi]

Your hypothetical thread where anyone can submit a review already exists, and has existed for a long time. It's called Creature Feature.

How many people know of this thread?

[mintnut]

17

[Sunset]

17

that's 17 more than before, woah

[DraxoBox]

Forgive the extremely irrelevant question: How do you become a reviewer?

EDIT: Next person to post gets the 100th comment on this topic.