So Traffic Is Down

[mx]

Despite my best efforts, sputniks traffic is declining ... every day. Since I had huge success with mxtabs, I'm worried that I'm doing something fundamentally wrong. So, as a help to me, I need to know

1) What you like the best about sputnik / what makes you come back / what you dislike
2) What would make sputnik more fun to visit, for both new and returning users.
3) What on the web do you find addicting? News? Community? Information?
4) Is the problem not a problem with the site, but unrelated? Or is there something about the site that needs to change?

I want this site to be AWESOME - yes with capitals - but at this point I'm not sure quite where to take it. Is it even worth it adding new features, if users don't really care, or if it won't mean an increase in traffic?

[masada]

well it is summer. i think peolpe have better things to do than post on a website

[Storm In A Teacup]

1) What you like the best about sputnik / what makes you come back / what you dislike

I like how the site is community driven and that the users, old and new, know that they're all important to the site. What makes me come back is how I like writing reviews and it helps me to write better. I also can get criticism more here than other places. I don't like how some people will instantly flame a poorly written review despite the fact it may be a users first, second, or even third review. People learn and when they learn they try new things and that means even after twenty reviews people will try and 'reinvent' themselves', but it won't always be met with appreciation, or constructive criticism, which I think makes people not want to come back.

2) What would make sputnik more fun to visit, for both new and returning users.

I think that what we have currently is great and not much is actually wrong. Some things could be tweaked, but I'm sure someone like Liberi will mention it more in depth than I could.

3) What on the web do you find addicting? News? Community? Information?

All three are equally important. Sputnikmusic should be a place that you can go to for both past and present news. Somewhere that with one stop there you don't need to go anywhere else on the web for what you need. Community is as important as it develops a sense of 'family' for some people and those people need to know that they're being listened to, which is how it already is. Some people bog that down a bit with their at times 'leetist' behavior.

4) Is the problem not a problem with the site, but unrelated? Or is there something about the site that needs to change?

You've done great, J. I can only see good things with the site's future and you may just need to drive the connection to Sputnikmusic and the Forums a bit more is all possibly. Maybe form partnerships with other music related sites. You have a link on Sputnikmusic about being linked to the site, but only MX Tabs and the forums are on there. Go after partnerships yourself.

Hope that was helpful somewhat instead of being a useless speach.

[masada]

i think the only problem i have with the site is that there aren't any interesting reviews.

[Phaedra]

i think the only problem i have with the site is that there aren't any interesting reviews.
I clearly refute that point, and point towards the review of Joni Mitchell's Blue as example. Furthermore, I do not consider it egotistical, but rather a valid example of one of many highly interesting reviews on the site.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Is it even worth it adding new features, if users don't really care, or if it won't mean an increase in traffic?
I like the features, but I'm worried there's becoming too many and my profile is becoming very fiddly. I think you should concentrate on making sure the existing features are as good as you can make them before embarking on anything new.

[A-Unit]

Despite my best efforts, sputniks traffic is declining ... every day. Since I had huge success with mxtabs, I'm worried that I'm doing something fundamentally wrong. So, as a help to me, I need to know

1) What you like the best about sputnik / what makes you come back / what you dislike
2) What would make sputnik more fun to visit, for both new and returning users.
3) What on the web do you find addicting? News? Community? Information?
4) Is the problem not a problem with the site, but unrelated? Or is there something about the site that needs to change?

I want this site to be AWESOME - yes with capitals - but at this point I'm not sure quite where to take it. Is it even worth it adding new features, if users don't really care, or if it won't mean an increase in traffic?
A) I don't know anyone who would use an entire site dedicated to CD Reviews. You might somehow get the odd google result tho.
B) Anyone who really is interested in a CD and would like a review would probably prefer one that isnt made by 15 year olds on the internet. :-\

mxtabs was successful cause it acually served a purpose.
this sputnik business is just nonsense.

[Iluvatar]

Thanks for the entirely counter-productive post.

I really have no idea on how to really fix any of this, but I agree with SOP that building up on whats here would be useful. Expanding the news section would probably help as well.

[Phaedra]

I like the features, but I'm worried there's becoming too many and my profile is becoming very fiddly. I think you should concentrate on making sure the existing features are as good as you can make them before embarking on anything new.
Which is what I have been trying to say for months.

If your traffic is dropping, put a poll somewhere on the main page of sputnik saying "How did you find this site?"
A) Friend
B) Through mxtabs
C) Advertising
etc

If one area of the poll comes up short, say advertising. Then surely we need to do more advertising!

[Storm In A Teacup]

I like the features, but I'm worried there's becoming too many and my profile is becoming very fiddly. I think you should concentrate on making sure the existing features are as good as you can make them before embarking on anything new.

Exactly what he said.

[pulseczar]

Well one problem that's really been bugging me, is that I always get switched to the light skin whenever I go to a band page with the new URL system. And when that happens, the "more" info button for the band bios doesn't work, and the "dark" skin button doesn't either. There's a lot of bug problems in terms of that.

Another problem is that the band members link (again, this mostly happens when I use the new band URLs) sometimes doesn't work, and leads to an "insufficient information" page, even though I've seen that band member on other band pages. Another problem is that when I click on any of the members, it follows the same link of another member, and I can't get to any other member besides that one.

Lastly, with the new band URLs, I can't reach bands with special characters, ones with accents in letters and what not.

But really, all of that fixed won't help increase traffic.

[Dave de Sylvia]

A) I don't know anyone who would use an entire site dedicated to CD Reviews. You might somehow get the odd google result tho.
B) Anyone who really is interested in a CD and would like a review would probably prefer one that isnt made by 15 year olds on the internet. :-\

mxtabs was successful cause it acually served a purpose.
this sputnik business is just nonsense.
I've been saying this for months but people keep using the site regardless of my protestations. It's ****ing annoying.

[mx]

I've been saying this for months but people keep using the site regardless of my protestations. It's ****ing annoying.

:lol:

Personally, when I try to find new music I run into cd stores, close my eyes, and grab things of the shelves. Alternately, I look at the nicest album covers.

[masada]

EXCUSE ME I'M LEGALLY BLIND CAN YOU HELP ME FIND A NEW ALBUM TO LISSN TO?????

"sir... open your eyes"

OH RIGHT I KNEW THAT

[Storm In A Teacup]

The point of the site in a way is for people who write reviews that maybe want to eventually write on a proffesional level one day and that they could learn here. Maybe people who are exceptional reviewers on the site could be tasked with advising people on how to write better reviews. Galapogos, Eliminator (on a serious day), Jom, ShadowsFallen, and one or two others would be great at giving advise to people on helping them with reviews. If they want to do it. It could just be an unsaid thing that many people here try and help as many people as they can, which some already do anyway.

[Iluvatar]

I give people good advice and stuff. It's just that people never listen :-/

And I pretty much agree with that partnership thing as well, since if I remember correctly sputnik doesnt have that much extra resources to be thrown around for adverts.

[pulseczar]

Yeah I should start giving advice again. And I should also start reviewing on a regular basis again :(

[mx]

I've tried forming partnerships, but nobody wants to link exchcange

[Storm In A Teacup]

That's weird. Maybe it's just me, but MF, MX and Sputnik (even with decreased activity) still seem fairly popular, it'd almost be stupid to refuse.

[mx]

Anyone who really is interested in a CD and would like a review would probably prefer one that isnt made by 15 year olds on the internet. :-\

Well, here is the fundamental problem with the site. Which pole do we gravitate towards? Is this a cd review site where anyone can review music, no matter how bad, and improve? Or is it a music review site, where the writers just happen to be users? It could be both things, currently it is in the middle. In other words, do we open the floodgates to wards anyone to review or close them? Closing them slightly would lead to higher standards of reviews on the site, and more of traffic for people looking to see quality reviews. Opening would lead to more participation but less quality for an outside user to the community

[Hep Kat]

I like the features, but I'm worried there's becoming too many and my profile is becoming very fiddly. I think you should concentrate on making sure the existing features are as good as you can make them before embarking on anything new.

This. A while back there was discussion about having too many features on sputnik, and about how it all may overwhelm people. The site is just starting to feel a little bit cluttered, is all.

Which is what I have been trying to say for months.

If your traffic is dropping, put a poll somewhere on the main page of sputnik saying "How did you find this site?"
A) Friend
B) Through mxtabs
C) Advertising
etc

If one area of the poll comes up short, say advertising. Then surely we need to do more advertising!

This is a good idea. Roll with it.

<words>

Right, that ties into what SOP said. Focus on working on what we have now. In the future, once sputnik is an internet-wide empire, we can screw around with whatever we want (and by we, I mean you, Jeremy).

The point of the site in a way is for people who write reviews that maybe want to eventually write on a proffesional level one day and that they could learn here. Maybe people who are exceptional reviewers on the site could be tasked with advising people on how to write better reviews. Galapogos, Eliminator (on a serious day), Jom, ShadowsFallen, and one or two others would be great at giving advise to people on helping them with reviews. If they want to do it. It could just be an unsaid thing that many people here try and help as many people as they can, which some already do anyway.

This is also a good idea. And it kind of brings me to a point that I've been meaning to get to for a little while now: positive/negative votes on reviews.

Look, when people first start, their reviews may not be of sputnik-vet quality, and that's fairly understandable. Still, if I had written 2-3 reviews, and had something like an 11% approval rating, that wouldn't exactly entice me to keep going. I see a lot of exasperated comments from users who make a sincere effort to do well review-wise, but are constantly being dumped on by neg votes.

The whole pos/neg system should stay, but people should be more lenient about it. Just because someone came on the site and made their first review for Master of Puppets and gave it a "5," without "justifying" the rating, so what? Don't neg it ffs. Give the person some words of encouragement, and give them a reason to want to do better in the future.

It all comes down to keeping people interested. People who write reviews and are constantly criticized are generally inclined to give up, from what I've seen. The whole site needs to be somewhat lenient in the future.


Just my 2 cents.

[pulseczar]

Maybe you could have like a "beginning reviewer" class for those who are still developing as reviewers/have learning disabilities?

[Hep Kat]

Maybe you could have like a "beginning reviewer" class for those who are still developing as reviewers/have learning disabilities?

That's a good idea. It may complicate things, but I think it might keep people going. How do you think something like that would work though? Would the reviews that they post be tagged as being from said "class" or something, thus protecting them from a storm of negative votes or whatever? Would we have, for example, intermediate, expert, and moderator (for mods, obviously) classes for everyone?

The only real problem there is that people's opinions may start being valued more than others. You don't want to belittle/alienate anyone.

[Storm In A Teacup]

I don't like the voting thing, just get rid of it. My reasons are what Hep-Cat said, but I simply don't think people are going to stop with the negging of new users.

[pulseczar]

Well, if the new classes are implemented, we wouldn't really need a voting system. The only problem that getting rid of the voting system leaves would be how to decide which review should be default (ie mods evaluate each review, little polls in this forum).

[Iluvatar]

Or maybe have it where you can't vote for a users first 5 (or whatever number( reviews, to give them a slight bit of leeway when it comes to writing?

[Hep Kat]

I don't like the voting thing, just get rid of it. My reasons are what Hep-Cat said, but I simply don't think people are going to stop with the negging of new users.

Well, kill the voting, you kill the approval %, and you kill the ranking. Jeremy has said that he wants to keep the ranking, because that keeps people's drive alive.

I'm indifferent to it, really. Am I proud of my approval/ranking? Yes. Could I live without it? Yes, easily.

You want to improve things yes, but you don't want to disrupt what we already have going too much.

Well, if the new classes are implemented, we wouldn't really need a voting system. The only problem that getting rid of the voting system leaves would be how to decide which review should be default (ie mods evaluate each review, little polls in this forum).

Letting the users decide which review should be flagged sounds like an excellent idea.

Or maybe have it where you can't vote for a users first 5 (or whatever number( reviews, to give them a slight bit of leeway when it comes to writing?

I was thinking something along those lines. Of course, there's always the possibility that people won't ever improve. Then again, most of the people that are like that will probably lose interest anyway.

[pulseczar]

Again, if people want a ranking, they can aim to get into the "expert" class, as Hep Kat suggested. That would leaev them with some sort of validation, I imagine.

[Hep Kat]

Again, if people want a ranking, they can aim to get into the "expert" class, as Hep Kat suggested. That would leaev them with some sort of validation, I imagine.

That sounds reasonable enough. However, you still have to be careful about anything along those lines: you don't ever want anyone to feel inferior to anyone else; we're all meant to be equals in the sputnik game.

[Iluvatar]

Except when it comes to the rankings.

EDIT: I'm just not a big fan of the rankings, as they are far too slanted in favor of the number of reviews.

[pulseczar]

Except when it comes to the rankings.
Not really. I mean, yes they are rankings, but has anyone actually used those rankings against someone else? No, any real elitism that's emerged has always been for irony's sake, or a joke (ie cheeto, eliminator, and I that day Sputnik turned into an anarchy).

[Storm In A Teacup]

Maybe the thing where it shows (# of # found this review helpful) just doesn't show up on the review, but still stays and it will just be unknown whether or not someone negged you besides your %.

[Hep Kat]

Except when it comes to the rankings.

Well, obviously. Perhaps if we were ranked against other in our "classes" only. The best thing about the whole "class" thing, is if someone is labeled a "New Reviewer" or whatever, yet their work is being praised, they know that they're not at the bottom of the barrel due to lack of quality, it's all over the time they joined/started to contribute.

The thing about any of this is that it requires massive changes to the site, and I don't know if we need that.

[Zebra]

The big problem with sputnik (for me) is how there aren't enough reviews that branch out to every genre. Genres such as ska, reggae, jazz, and electronica don't receive a lot of attention and there aren't as many reviews for those specific genres.

A good example of this would be the 2006 rankings. Seven out of the ten albums are metal. To me this is a terrible thing because sputnik should expand your music knowledge and try to get you into different types of music instead of focusing on one specific genre.

[Iluvatar]

^^ Zebra, lest we forget, those genres do admittedly put out far less albums per year than most others, or at least albums of any real note.

Hep (Edit): That would make more sense, but the essential flaw with the ranking system is still there. This really has nothing to do with increasing user traffic, just user content...ness...

[Hep Kat]

The big problem with sputnik (for me) is how there aren't enough reviews that branch out to every genre. Genres such as ska, reggae, jazz, and electronica don't receive a lot of attention and there aren't as many reviews for those specific genres.

A good example of this would be the 2006 rankings. Seven out of the ten albums are metal. To me this is a terrible thing because sputnik should expand your music knowledge and try to get you into different types of music instead of focusing on one specific genre.

True. But you can't stop metalheads from reviewing. You just need to take the good with the bad, I suppose.

There's also this:

^^ Zebra, lest we forget, those genres do admittedly put out far less albums per year than most others, or at least albums of any real note.

Maybe the thing where it shows (# of # found this review helpful) just doesn't show up on the review, but still stays and it will just be unknown whether or not someone negged you besides your %.

Yeah, but the crux of everything is the %, methinks.

[JohnXDoe]

Despite my best efforts, sputniks traffic is declining ... every day. Since I had huge success with mxtabs, I'm worried that I'm doing something fundamentally wrong.

1) What you like the best about sputnik / what makes you come back / what you dislike
2) What would make sputnik more fun to visit, for both new and returning users.
3) What on the web do you find addicting? News? Community? Information?
4) Is the problem not a problem with the site, but unrelated? Or is there something about the site that needs to change?

I want this site to be AWESOME.....

1. I enjoy writing reviews. I like the community that is based around music and the discussion of music. I enjoy the formats and features and what not. I think it has enough features. It's packed with features. Good enough. What do I dislike? Um, it's loosey goosey nature. I know it's supposed to be a user oriented, "rate your music" site, but a bit of method to the madness would be most welcome. And the high marks some reviewers give to trash? Someone (Med) once explained to me the reviewer rating doesn't mean anything really because the user ratings are what's more important. But if sputnik is to flourish as an "awesome" site when people click onto a review they should see a reviewer rating they can trust, not a mockery of the rating system that misleads them. Especially if some in the industry are starting to take notice of the site, as you have said before.

2. More fun? I can't think of anything. It's pretty fun if you are involved, if not I suppose you just read and move on. We can give out e-cookies, maybe...

3. The whole thing. Community, news, reviews. IMO sputnik does this incredibly well for the participant. Now the participants have to start doing a little better for the non-paticipant.

4. I don't think it's a site problem. I think it's a quality problem. Which is hard to manage with a site of this nature and spirit, I understand. The news mods were a step in the right direction. I believe they will do good work. But still, the news section suffers. IMO a news item should be required to have a minimum of three strong paragraphs of information. Otherwise it's not really news at all. More like a cliff note. Or at least two lengthy paragraphs of information. I also think reviews need to be edited for format and grammar by a mod before it get's put up. Or soon after. I see some reviews "accepted" that are not really acceptable in anyway. People click on that stuff and just keep moving on. A site people will return to is what is desired. And people will return to a site with information, reviews, and ratings they can trust and feel good about reading. Their is really no bar set at sputnik. Not even a really, really low one. So the sooner you get some "staff writers" together to sort of lead by example in an organized way, the better, IMO....

....just my two cents....

[Zebra]

^^ Zebra, lest we forget, those genres do admittedly put out far less albums per year than most others, or at least albums of any real note.

Exactly. If these genres have less albums then shouldn't we try to feature the one's that have been reviewed on the site rather then featuring seven metal albums on the main page? I really think that sputnik should show off more genres and diversity. I'm fine with the fact that there are going to be more metal albums reviewed but I don't think the main page is very appealing to a new user who dislikes metal.

[Hep Kat]

<lotsofwords>

I want to touch on the last part more than anything: the grammar thing is a fantastic idea, but I doubt that the mods would have times to do that for every single review. They need to keep the site up and running, ya know? Unless several more mods are added, then that won't work. Mr. mx himself has said time and time again that a lot of people here deserve to be mods, but the site needs more time to grow.

Exactly. If these genres have less albums then shouldn't we try to feature the one's that have been reviewed on the site rather then featuring seven metal albums on the main page? I really think that sputnik should show off more genres and diversity. I'm fine with the fact that there are going to be more metal albums reviewed but I don't think the main page is very appealing to a new user who dislikes metal.

Then we should get rid of the top ranked albums on the main page, simple as. You wanted a place to put music list info? There it is.


edit: palindrome post :cool:

edit the sequel: Oshi, lists are where the forum posts where. Nevermind about that then. Hey, cool, that was my idea :cool:

[JohnXDoe]

I want to touch on the last part more than anything: the grammar thing is a fantastic idea, but I doubt that the mods would have times to do that for every single review. They need to keep the site up and running, ya know? Unless several more mods are added, than that won't work. Mr. mx himself has said time and time again that a lot of people here deserve to be mods, but the site needs more time to grow.
Not rewriting the review. But some users just don't care enough to check and double check, or even do anything about phrasing, paragraphs, periods, or well constructed sentences. A review can always be touched up and corrected. Very quickly. Like a teacher correcting a paper.

[pulseczar]

Not rewriting the review. But some users just don't care enough to check and double check, or even do anything about phrasing, paragraphs, periods, or well constructed sentences. A review can always be touched up and corrected. Very quickly. Like a teacher correcting a paper.
This issue can be somewhat fixed with the classes idea. If someone is too lazy to write a coherently structured review, s/he'll never get out of being beginner. It's not hard to just run it through a spell checker, and ask some veterans what's wrong with how they wrote the review. I don't think there's any need to baby people by actually going through the trouble of correcting someone else work on his/her own free time.

[Hep Kat]

Not rewriting the review. But some users just don't care enough to check and double check, or even do anything about phrasing, paragraphs, periods, or well constructed sentences. A review can always be touched up and corrected. Very quickly. Like a teacher correcting a paper.

Right, but do you know how many reviews probably hit the approval queue a day? I mean, the mods can't go over every little detail for all those reviews.

I mean, it could be way less than I think it is. Maybe I assume we get too many new people around here :(

This issue can be somewhat fixed with the classes idea. If someone is too lazy to write a coherently structured review, s/he'll never get out of being beginner. It's not hard to just run it through a spell checker, and ask some veterans what's wrong with how they wrote the review. I don't think there's any need to baby people by actually going through the trouble of correcting someone else work on his/her own free time.

The more I read about this class idea, the more I like it. It makes perfect sense, and could certainly motivate people.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Going back to what Jeremy said about which direction to take the site, I think it's pretty obvious. If you want more people to visit the site, then go with the professional reviews and perhaps add regular columns on current musical events and artist features. If you want more actual users, push the community aspect of the site by introducing listening parties, pushing for interviews with artists (I know some post on the forums) where users can submit their own questions, or even become less stringent on what's the minimum acceptable quality for a review.

I don't know how quickly the site's traffic is decreasing, but it's very possible that it is seasonal.

[Hep Kat]

Going back to what Jeremy said about which direction to take the site, I think it's pretty obvious. If you want more people to visit the site, then go with the professional reviews and perhaps add regular columns on current musical events and artist features. If you want more actual users, push the community aspect of the site by introducing listening parties, pushing for interviews with artists (I know some post on the forums) where users can submit their own questions, or even become less stringent on what's the minimum acceptable quality for a review.

I don't know how quickly the site's traffic is decreasing, but it's very possible that it is seasonal.

Maybe a compromise? Perhaps sputnik could add a whole new area to itself, one for professional reviews that are backed by record companies or whatever?

I want to preserve the community aspect, personally. This site is unique: allowing people to share their opinions like this, it's a brilliant idea in theory.


Maybe sputnik just needs to be two-sided: one for users, and one for visitors. Who knows? Either aspect could feed off of the other, and the site could grow like you wouldn't believe.

[JohnXDoe]

This issue can be somewhat fixed with the classes idea. If someone is too lazy to write a coherently structured review, s/he'll never get out of being beginner. It's not hard to just run it through a spell checker, and ask some veterans what's wrong with how they wrote the review. I don't think there's any need to baby people by actually going through the trouble of correcting someone else work on his/her own free time.
I haven't time to read the thread right now so the classes idea didn't reach me.

Editing/proof reading I don't feel is "babying". Even the pro's at Rolling Stone have proof readers and editors. Because they to make mistakes and before it hit's the public eye it has to be dealt with objectively by an outside influence. No biggie. It's just presentation stuff.

[Hep Kat]

I haven't time to read the thread right now so the classes idea didn't reach me.

Editing/proof reading I don't feel is "babying". Even the pro's at Rolling Stone have proof readers and editors. Because they to make mistakes and before it hit's the public eye it has to be dealt with objectively by an outside influence. No biggie. It's just presentation stuff.

Well, since we want the site to grow, we'd need a lot of editors eventually. There may only be a half-dozen or so for a magazine, but how many writers are there? sputnik is designed to bring in thousands of users. That's a lot of editing, and thus, the need for a bigger mod staff (or a new type of mod) is needed.


Oh, and Rolling Stone has hundreds of typos in it :p

[JohnXDoe]

Well, since we want the site to grow, we'd need a lot of editors eventually. There may only be a half-dozen or so for a magazine, but how many writers are there? sputnik is designed to bring in thousands of users. That's a lot of editing, and thus, the need for a bigger mod staff (or a new type of mod) is needed.

Oh, and Rolling Stone has hundreds of typos in it :p
It's not so much the typos as the sometimes poor content. No one is perfect, least of all me. But enough is enough.

No proof readers? Then let's get an organized staff in that will churn out quality (lol) work. Like I said, lead by example. It will make everyone want to do better. And keep bolstering that news section with real news, not single paragraph quips.

Oh, and the Rollling Stone typos? I blame the printing presses....

....nub. :mad:

[Hep Kat]

It's not so much the typos as the sometimes poor content. No one is perfect, least of all me. But enough is enough.

No proof readers? Then let's get an organized staff in that will churn out quality (lol) work. Like I said, lead by example. It will make everyone want to do better. And keep bolstering that news section with real news, not single paragraph quips.

Oh, and the Rollling Stone typos? I blame the printing presses....

....nub. :mad:

Well, that still calls for the need of a new staff. Yet another major overhaul. We're going to need to let the powers that be take all of this speculating into consideration, ya know.


stfu about the press. Gutenberg's invention is perfect!

[JohnXDoe]

Well, that still calls for the need of a new staff. Yet another major overhaul. We're going to need to let the powers that be take all of this speculating into consideration, ya know.


stfu about the press. Gutenberg's invention is perfect!
How are the powers that be going to take care of it when I'm way over here and you're way over there? :p

/powers that should be


Oh, and Gutenberg's invention is gay. That's why we have the internets....

[Hep Kat]

How are the powers that be going to take care of it when I'm way over here and you're way over there? :p

/powers that should be


Oh, and Gutenberg's invention is gay. That's why we have the internets....

Hey, whoa. Don't imply things like that. Or whatever you're going on about...


The internets suck, haven't you heard? A good book > the internets.

[masada]

reading is for city folk

[Neoteric]

i think the only problem i have with the site is that there aren't any interesting reviews.
I agree here, anyone noticed my inactivity? I've been out with friends, being busy and stuff.

[masada]

actually i haven't

[Hep Kat]

I agree here, anyone noticed my inactivity? I've been out with friends, being busy and stuff.

Actually, yes, I have.

[JohnXDoe]

Hey, whoa. Don't imply things like that. Or whatever you're going on about...


The internets suck, haven't you heard? A good book > the internets.
E-Books pwn all, then. I had fifty of them but System Mechanic 6 deleted them all. :(

And I don't know what the hell I'm going on about. It's just something I do. Now you stfu. Go review a Doris Day album or somethin....

[masada]

Be Nice

[Neoteric]

Actually, yes, I have.
Yeah, it's just the time of the year when people don't want to sit in their houses in front of a computer all day.

actually i haven'tPfft... n00bs....

[masada]

well i did notice a severe lack of megadeth reviews

[JohnXDoe]

Yeah, it's just the time of the year when people don't want to sit in their houses in front of a computer all day.
Indeed, my good fellow. What sputnik needs is more rain and snow. Bad weather will get us going yet. :)

[masada]

bad weather > summer

[Iluvatar]

Bad weather<<<increased site traffic :(

[superpeer]

I don't know if it's just me, but on IE the genre drop down boxes don't work, which makes browsing slightly harder. (I know I can use Firefox, but fact is that many people use IE)

Also, I still regularly get bad links, which is just annoying. Like some others said, make sure everything on the site is (virtually) perfect before adding new things.

[Storm In A Teacup]

I never even knew there were genre drop down boxes. :-\

Stupid Internet Explorer. :mad::smash:

[superpeer]

Heh, yeah, when I view my Sputnik profile Acrobat Reader pops up for no apparent reason too, but I seem to be an isolated case in that respect.

[Storm In A Teacup]

well i did notice a severe lack of megagh4y reviews
The whole genre of trash itself has been lacking lately.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I don't know if it's just me, but on IE the genre drop down boxes don't work, which makes browsing slightly harder. (I know I can use Firefox, but fact is that many people use IE)
Hmm, you're right. Have you got the latest edition of IE?

Also, I still regularly get bad links, which is just annoying. Like some others said, make sure everything on the site is (virtually) perfect before adding new things.
Bad links as in legitimate links sometimes don't work, or like when you click a "similar artist" that isn't in the database and an error shows up?

Regarding the latter, I think it'd be a big improvement if instead of this (http://sputnikmusic.com/band/Vain), a simple message came up saying "this band/artist is not currently covered in the archive" or something.

Heh, yeah, when I view my Sputnik profile Acrobat Reader pops up for no apparent reason too, but I seem to be an isolated case in that respect.
That seems like a problem with your file associations. One of the files that loads when you open your profile must be configured to request Acrobat Reader. But I have no idea what you'd do about it.

[JohnXDoe]

Sounds like a certain someone sucks a little at computers. Blame the site, why don't you..... :(

[superpeer]

The whole genre of trash itself has been lacking lately.

Maybe if you'd stop referring to it as trash.


Hmm, you're right. Have you got the latest edition of IE?

I think so. Unless Internet Explorer 6 isn't the newest anymore.

Bad links as in legitimate links sometimes don't work, or like when you click a "similar artist" that isn't in the database and an error shows up?

Malformed URLs. I forget where I get them, but I do remember that I always get them if I click Therapy?, because of the question mark. Not a huge problem, but still slightly annoying.


That seems like a problem with your file associations. One of the files that loads when you open your profile must be configured to request Acrobat Reader. But I have no idea what you'd do about it.

Yeah, possible. But as I said, that's just an individual problem, no biggie. I've always hated Acrobat Reader anyway. Bastard.


Sounds like a certain someone sucks a little at computers. Blame the site, why don't you.....

If I could find the ban button, you'd be so dead. :mad:

[morrissey]

I think all the little features are great for casual users. I'll use my little brothers as examples. Both are young and don't have the ability or patience to write out a review or even a blurb. One of my little brothers (user alexander) actually submitted a Johnny Cash blurb that was along the lines of "i realy like album!". Reviews are not for them. But because of all the little features, they can still participate in the site and have a good time of it. It's like how rating albums seems like such a pointless section of the site to most of us, but to a new user it is just simple and easy enough to be exactly what they're looking for. We have to look at the site from an outsider's point of view - to them, lists, ratings, favourite bands, pie charts etc. are exciting yet simple to use. So while they may not seem important to us, they are important to casual users. Which is exactly the crowd we need to reign in. Draw them in with the features.

As for the aim of the site... I think it is possible to have it both ways. I was initially opposed to the idea of "staff writers" or an "expert" writing team, but the idea is growing on me. There should probably be three or four gradations, with the lowest level being new reviewers and the highest being our ambassador writers. These top level reviews have to be good writers, of course, but I think their main focus should be reviewing the lastest releases. Have 4-5 of them, and among them they cover the major releases of the month. Maybe have one for every genre. Make sure pop, hiphop, jazz, electronic music etc. don't get neglected.
People should move up a level based on writing quality only - not how long they have been here, how many reviews they have or how friendly they are with the mods. They will be manually selected, this will take a while at first but I'm sure it will become old hat quickly enough.
Anyway these staff writers would represent the professional side. They review new material in a timely fashion, they review maturely and are helpful to newcomers. Aside from this injection of professionalism, everything else will be community-aimed.

As an aside, respecting the request to have mods proof-read: I'm not sure how I stand on it. It's kind of a waste of time for us to be going through every review, I think that should be the writer's responsibility. I'm not saying I refuse to do it or anything, but I gave up on trying to proofread pretty quickly after being modded. It IS babying the users. Run your own damn spellcheck, it's not hard. But if the only way for these reviews to ever be grammatically correct is for us to correct them, then maybe that is what needs to happen.

[Hep Kat]

^^^
So yeah. She just summed all my feelings up :lol:

[Iluvatar]

We need more sex appeal.

Super sexy action music reviews anyone?

[peon]

i recommend a name change, sputnikmusic doesn't really do anything for you i'm afraid

[Zebra]

These top level reviews have to be good writers, of course, but I think their main focus should be reviewing the lastest releases. Have 4-5 of them, and among them they cover the major releases of the month. Maybe have one for every genre. Make sure pop, hiphop, jazz, electronic music etc. don't get neglected.

I personally dislike this idea. I'm not saying that I'm a top reviewer, because I'm not but i dislike the fact that you said they should cover the major releases of the month. The reason I like to post my reviews here is because you don't have to review certain albums, you can review whatever you please regardless of its release date or popularity. That being said I like the idea of incorporating genres such as jazz and electronica into the mix which are often neglected on sputnikmusic.

[RandyfromPennywise]

Well I would say that I was getting into reviewing towards the end of last year, just as the site crashed that time, and I lost 10 reviews or thereabouts. I was quite enjoying doing some reviews here and there, and my drive came from a few things, largely trying to get reviews up for bands that didn't have reviews who I thought deserved them. Perhaps this isn't the best example because eventually people will run out of bands, but in relation to my example I'd say giving people a reason to review is the most important part about getting dedicated users. But then again I'm not even sure if it's dedicated users you are looking for, but anyway. I think once you get them in, they should stay. I was visiting Sputnik everyday for a while before the crash and then I sort of lost interest. Perhaps if on MXtabs you could have something saying "This album doesn't have a review. Do you want to write one?" on the pages of tabs from albums that haven't been reviewed, that could be a way to attract people's interest who would otherwise not visit Sputnik.

I really am not sure if this has helped at all.

EDIT: Well I just looked at mxtabs, I see there is already a "*band name* Music Reviews" link on the band page. The idea about doing it on each tab-page, well it could take a bloody long time to do but might get more hits. Probably the best results would come from not only doing it for songs that don't have reviews but ones that do as well. However, having said that, when I go to get tabs, I generally just get the tabs, print them off and go play them, without pissing about on the net. Well it's an idea at least, I guess.

[Jom]

I have a rather large reply for this, but I do want to say this:

To those who were mentioning a spell/grammar check:

When I was on the staff I went through reviews in the queue and fixed spelling and grammar. Why? Because I had nothing else to do!

Just kidding. I did it because I wanted to encourage these new users to continue to review, even though I sent them e-mails telling them.

One of the cool things about being on the forums staff is that you get access to everyone's e-mail address (unless you use tempinbox or some other... uh, temporary inbox). I frequently sent e-mails to people and offered advice and suggestions.

Again, by no means am I saying that I am a stellar music reviewer, but I am sound in the English language and can spell and all that other good stuff. I know that my reviews aren't going to talk about modes or theory or some other wankfest terminology that someone learns in an intense music school, but I do know that there aren't any terrible spacing issues or incorrect spelling/grammar (as far as I know, I haven't really double-checked, haha).

But, point is, is that I sent e-mails to people to help them out, which I liked doing because I like to see people succeed, even on an Internet site.

Moz can vouch for me when I say that I did spelling/grammar check.

However, users like Zebra and tom79 can vouch for me when I say that I wrote e-mails to users. For instance, I was able to help them with being able to post on the forums. I was glad for that, because they have a lot of problems to report or ideas to be shared.

Anyway, this is a really big tangent from what Jeremy was asking, but I just wanted to give my $.02 and say that it was very, very time-consuming to spell-check and grammar-check for people when they could have done it themselves, and I give a big fat 123 to Moz when she said that people can run their own checks.

[morrissey]

Trust Jommy, he knows what he's talking about. Even fixing little errors like capitalising "i" and spelling "definitely" correctly take at least a couple minutes per review. It may not seem like much, but when we get 5+ new reviews in the queue a day, it adds up like you wouldn't believe. Jom was always good about fixing up people's errors but it just isn't worth it in the end. Especially since at least half of them won't fix it on their second review because they expect us to do it for them. Giving advice, we can do. But we can't implement those suggestions for them - they need to learn how to do it themselves.

[masada]

i saw we just beat them with a stick until they learn

[Jom]

If I was put into a position to do the spell check and grammar check and style check and whatever, I would do it, but my inbox would be astronomically huge while my output would turn out to be five reviews a day or something.

As Moz said, it became really tedious fixing the same mistakes over and over again ('definitely' has been incorrectly spelt at least fifteen different times, from 'defanitely' to 'deafinately' to 'definately,' etc.), and it just wasn't a whole lot of fun anymore because I would wind up writing new sentences for people, and it was like I was writing a new review for them based on their 'rough draft.'

While one could argue that these first-time reviews aren't essays, they still eat up a good chunk of time.

One of the biggest problems I struggled with while editing/modding was, "Do I bother to fix this review up, because [the detail is clearly lacking / the album name is spelt wrong / insert other reason here]?" Sometimes I would spent a good ten, fifteen minutes on one review alone, only to see it get deleted because it wasn't up to the site's standards.

Time, why do you punish me? Like a wave crashin' into shore, you wash away my dreams :'(

Hahaha.

[JohnXDoe]

I was considering this further and I'm actually in agreement with Moz and Jom now. So miracles do happen, lol. I took a look at all the reviews on the front page right now and they are well done. To continue focus on the matter I think is good, though. Perhaps have one of the mods write up a minmum requirement statement. Nothing too difficult, but as Moz said, spellcheck, paragraphs, grammer. I consider myself of average skill as a reviewer and I go back over mine again and again and again for that very reason. And I hate to see reviews posted that can easily be edited by the reviewer yet for hours, days, and forever the reviewer never does a thing about it. I'm talking about very basic stuff here, not the quality or lack thereof of the review. It just looks bad to the average web surfer, IMO.

And emails as Jom suggested would be excellent. They don't have to be personal. They can even be form letters letting some reviewers know what is expected and also offering advice and encouragment. Perhaps it's the least we can do.

[Phaedra]

I do not pretend to have the answers for your website, however let us take a look at other popular websites on the internet, and see what their focus is, what new users go to each time.

Gamespot
Is quite poorly done. The flash scrolling interface is the first thing users stumble upon, and it is nicely done. Sputnik could really do with something like that, highlighting the most interesting recent reviews, muses, staff articles etc etc.

However there is far too much detail. The site has three menus essentially at the top. One for the sister sites (not given any attention at all), the 2nd the consoles and important sections, then third less important sections.

However what Gamespot does is offer too much content on the main page (about 20 different sections), yet all the content that would be appealing to regulars, goes down the bottom. The content first viewable to new users is the most appealing to them. The large abundance of content is a flaw, but at least they move it all down.

Allmusic
The first thing that is important to new users, and returning casual users is the search function. It is no doubt the most commonly used feature, and as such is located right where the user first looks, and right inbetween advertising and the site logo. The most important content to profit, and retaining users is all there, without having to move your eyes much at all.

The genres below the search are vivid, crisp and slick. The less important ways of browsing are given less presedence (available through clicking more..), yet this means less clutter, which is gooooood. The site menu at the top right does tend to get lost a bit, and there are too many adverts cluttering the place. Yet I guess for profit, that is best. The featured article is once again given great presedence, and since it appeals more to regular viewers, it is placed in a position that new users will tend to ignore, or not look at first. Yet it is still there, and still feels important. Thew new releases down the side are crisp, detailed and large enough to deduce the albums easily.

Once again I'd argue too much content, but a better site setup than gamespot.

trademe.co.nz
Perhaps the NZ site with the best layout and design. It is simple, feels relaxed and friendly. The auction categories are right in the middle of the page, easy to have a look through for new users, and to browse for regulars. The search also is a focal point, with a clear place on the left side of the screen. The layout feels very simple and clean, whilst also suiting the friendly, trusty site they try to promote.

twistedpolygon.net
Inside the main frame, the content is terrible. But I find myself going back a fair bit, just to play with the cool frame. Inside the main frame, the content is bland, a pain to read and relatively unseperated. Very unattractive aside from the frame.

rateyourmusic.com
Very basic design, but each section is big, and given just the right amount of content. There are essentially about half as many features on the front page as on sputnik, and I think that makes it a lot more attractive to new users. That side, many other pages on the website make me feel a bit lost, with far too much detail. It must be commended for its front page layout.

Wikipedia
There may be a lot of content on the main English page, with much of it being ignored, yet the search is seperated from the rest, and feels vivid amongst all the content. The actual main main front page is very basic, but very user friendly and allows easy access to a great range of the site. http://www.wikipedia.org/


Sorry if you found all this help useless, and a waste of time. I know I am hopeless when it comes to coding websites. But when it comes to consumers actions, and how to target them, I like to think I'm no dummy.

[FA]

1) What you like the best about sputnik / what makes you come back / what you dislike

reviews/A&I and S&L forums/nothing without sounding selfish or manipulative.

2) What would make sputnik more fun to visit, for both new and returning users.

Donno really

3) What on the web do you find addicting? News? Community? Information?

All of the above

4) Is the problem not a problem with the site, but unrelated? Or is there something about the site that needs to change?

The site seems fine, it's easy to use and to find your way around, so I'm really not helpful by answering these questions at all.

[Hep Kat]

Well, I agree with everything that Mozz, Jom, and JXD posted. Mostly because, ya know, all that stuff is correct :)

Mr. Phaedra brought up some excellent points, and certainly seems to know what he's talking about, despite being a n00b :p


I have one more thing to bring up that popped into my mind last night: the bands in the archive. If you're new to a site, and go to a search function to look for something, the fact that the search function doesn't work can be bad enough. However, if you do manage to complete a search, and you get no results, that can be kind of frustrating. Now, I like to browse through the band/artist archive on sputnik for fun from time to time, to see if there's anything that pops out at me. Put simply: there's a lot of interesting bands there, but how many super indie, nearly-impossible-to-find-their-albums-in-stores bands are going to appeal to a random browser with mainstream tastes?

I think the archive needs to be beefed up more. Any popular bands/artists of...well, any decade should be added if they aren't already there. Now, the catch is, we add them, but we don't fill up their bio or anything. We task a browsing user with that, and thus, they need to sign up. If we find enough people like tom79 who enjoy going around and fixing album dates and stuff, then we'll be golden.

I still stress the fact that sputnik should become a two-edged sword: one side of it being professional reviews; the other side being community reviews. As I stated before, this is the best way to go. Eventually, people will go to sputnik just for the latest music news and reviews, and they'll see that it has a section for writing your own reviews. "Cool" is what most people will think, imo.

There's another advantage to this: we'll draw in members who aren't musicians. You see, we musicians obviously take music very seriously. That means we can oftentimes be closed minded (not that any of you community members are, you seem to prove that all the time :cool:). Still, musicians tend to be somewhat elitist about...well, music. You know what I mean? Some (okay, a lot of them) tend to get into certain mindsets where they see everything in black and white. It's actually rather hard to explain, tbh, but I'm sure you catch my drift.

If we draw in new members this way, they may just be avid music enthusiasts, or aspiring journalists, etc. This means that they may be more inclined to write better, and may keep a more open mind about things.


That was my 4 cents. Now mods, check it for grammar mistakes and stuff ;)

[Jom]

This discussion of dividing the reviews site into professional vs. unprofessional reviews seems like it would be a nightmare for Jeremy to code. On the site, how are people to tell the difference between an established/professional/whatever reviewer from a reviewer who's writing just for the sake of writing? How are the two factions to be separated, if at all? The site already has a bunch of links on the top toolbar, so a link to one of the two sites wouldn't be feasible.

And, what about albums that have 902374 reviews for it, like Nevermind or American Idiot or Master of Puppets? What if the professional review gives an album like that a 2/5? Sure, it distinguishes the professional reviewer from the can't-write-very-well people, but it also alienates their opinion because there are so many reviews for those albums. It's not a problem where there are only two or three, but with that many reviews, it's quite tough.

Lastly, one thing that Moz, Jens, and I noticed is that there are many users who come to the site where English is not their primary language. Why should we discourage these users from coming to the site? I found it quite interesting that Moz gave advice/instructions in French to somebody, and Jens was speaking some weird language (I only recognized 'sauerkraut' and 'Guinness'), but point is, why should there be a disadvantage to non-English speakers for coming to the site? They could probably write a dead-nuts review in their native tounge, but a few things can get lost in translation.

Basically, I'm just wondering how you expect to divide the professional site from the unprofessional site.

[Hep Kat]

This discussion of dividing the reviews site into professional vs. unprofessional reviews seems like it would be a nightmare for Jeremy to code. On the site, how are people to tell the difference between an established/professional/whatever reviewer from a reviewer who's writing just for the sake of writing? How are the two factions to be separated, if at all? The site already has a bunch of links on the top toolbar, so a link to one of the two sites wouldn't be feasible.

And, what about albums that have 902374 reviews for it, like Nevermind or American Idiot or Master of Puppets? What if the professional review gives an album like that a 2/5? Sure, it distinguishes the professional reviewer from the can't-write-very-well people, but it also alienates their opinion because there are so many reviews for those albums. It's not a problem where there are only two or three, but with that many reviews, it's quite tough.

Lastly, one thing that Moz, Jens, and I noticed is that there are many users who come to the site where English is not their primary language. Why should we discourage these users from coming to the site? I found it quite interesting that Moz gave advice/instructions in French to somebody, and Jens was speaking some weird language (I only recognized 'sauerkraut' and 'Guinness'), but point is, why should there be a disadvantage to non-English speakers for coming to the site? They could probably write a dead-nuts review in their native tounge, but a few things can get lost in translation.

Basically, I'm just wondering how you expect to divide the professional site from the unprofessional site.

Well, I was thinking something like a new main page, tbh. Basically, you would come onto sptunik, and see three major things: professional reviews of new albums, music news, and information about the community aspects of the site. Maybe in the future there would be info about artist interviews or whatever else this site would eventually evolve to have.

We could still keep sputnik community-driven, we would just shift the immediate focus to attracting people to come to the site simply to read reviews and such. People want music news? They come to sputnik. They want to read reviews of their favortite artists? They come to sputnik. Anything else that comes up in the future? People come to sputnik. We should work to make sputnik a site that pops up in the heads of people whenever they think of online music information, or anything that pertains to that.

Now, the catch would be the fact that sputnik also features a community aspect to it. Think of it this way: you come to sputnik, and you see the community aspect links on the main page. You read something about how you can write reviews, rate music, and all that jazz. Now, what's the biggest feature? The class system. The better you write, and the more you help/participate, the higher you move up. Eventually, you could get added to the "staff reviewers" and write professional reviews for the site.

Now, wouldn't that give you due incentive to give it your all? Just preach to people about how much they'd be helping, and how this could go on a resume, college acceptance stuff, etc. That'll whet people's appetites, and BOOM! We've solved all the problems: we have people coming to the site for all the latest whatever, and we have people writing with a certain degree of quality, because they believe that they truly have something to work towards.

Tell me that doesn't sound cool :cool:

Now, about the multilingual thing: I, personally, don't think anyone should be discouraged from writing reviews. Basically, I see it this way: if they want to write, let them. Offer them help, point them in the right direction, and be encouraging. If we implement the changes that we've been developing ITT, then maybe it won't be so bad if people who aren't proficient in English can't ever move up in the world. We can keep people satisfied all the way around.

However, if people whose opinions count far more than mine believe that people like that should be discouraged from reviewing, then that's fine. It's a murky issue, and rather unfortunate actually :(

[JohnXDoe]

This discussion of dividing the reviews site into professional vs. unprofessional reviews seems like it would be a nightmare for Jeremy to code. On the site, how are people to tell the difference between an established/professional/whatever reviewer from a reviewer who's writing just for the sake of writing? How are the two factions to be separated, if at all? The site already has a bunch of links on the top toolbar, so a link to one of the two sites wouldn't be feasible.

And, what about albums that have 902374 reviews for it, like Nevermind or American Idiot or Master of Puppets? What if the professional review gives an album like that a 2/5? Sure, it distinguishes the professional reviewer from the can't-write-very-well people, but it also alienates their opinion because there are so many reviews for those albums. It's not a problem where there are only two or three, but with that many reviews, it's quite tough.
I don't think a pro site or side is necessary. Staff writers and News Mods are just a way to bolster the image and quality of the site in general. Their will also be those I would think who are as good as the staff writers but may not be on staff. Which is not to say that it will become some elite group. Personally among the best reviewers here I see little of that. But it may help set a benchmark and lend sputnik a bolstered image.

So far as the english as a second or third language people, I would think they are always welcome, also. But it is a primarily english speaking site, so while they should certainly be considered, they are in the vast minority among users and I'm sure they understand that. So IMO they don't have to be catered to in any particular way, as I'm sure primarily Indian or Chinese or Spanish speaking sites of a similar nature don't bend over backward or make policy based on what few english speaking users are around.


EDIT:I also want to add that since people are discussing the front page I think perhaps the "User Comments" section and aspect could be de-emphasized. Could be wrong here, but filling up the page with more stuff like we see on the Newsletter, reviews, articles, news, and letting the user find their own way through the site rather then pushing it at them all at once might be desirable. The forums/posting places will still be found but not promoted as heavily on the front page. Regular users know about this stuff, new users are attracted by pictures, color, layout, reviews, news. etc.


What we need is a Celebrity Gossip section. :p

[mx]

All these ideas are exceptional. I'll make an annoucment later today about the changes that will be made

[Hep Kat]

All these ideas are exceptional. I'll make an annoucment later today about the changes that will be made

Sounds good to me.

[innerdark]

So for as the english as a second or third language people, I would think they are always welcome, also. But it is a primarily english speaking site, so while they should certainly be considered, they are in the vast minority among users and I'm sure they understand that. So IMO they don't have to be catered to in any particular way, as I'm sure pimarily Indian or Chinese or Spanish speaking sites of a similar nature don't bend over backward or make policy based on what few english speaking users are around.

he's right you know

I do have one plan, call me crazy, call me stupid, but i think that you should make the Lesson Site part of the review site, that way, we can be a more than a review site, if you know what i mean. however, i think, just now, we need to fix some of the little search bugs et cetra

and i'm sure for the language barrier, we could have a bit more leeway for them, but more on that another time

[mx]

Most of the lessons are terrible, unfortunately

[Hep Kat]

^^^
Yeah, I might write something soon, but I don't really know where to begin. For now, I think the Lessons should be left as they are. They'll get on their feet eventually.

[RandyfromPennywise]

Just to clarify my earlier point, I was thinking about it a bit:

The best idea would be to integrate the tabs with the album reviews. This would be an absolute nightmare and take forever, but it could be a gradual process. Basically what I mean is in the review, the track listings are links to the tabs for that song listed on mxtabs. In the tab pages (as in, on each tab page, not just the band page), well if the album a tab [song] was from had a link to the review of it - as in, directly to that album, not just the band, this would be - I think - greatly beneficial to site traffic and user involvement.

This would require the entire tab directory to be catalogued, with each artist's tabs separated into their respective albums. I know this would take an absolute age but it could be a gradual process, with the mods organising one artist here and there, the most popular artists first.


Anyone understand what I mean, and, moreover, think it could help?

[Hep Kat]

^^^
mx mentioned doing something along those lines in the changes over summer thread.

[superpeer]

As Moz said, it became really tedious fixing the same mistakes over and over again ('definitely' has been incorrectly spelt at least fifteen different times, from 'defanitely' to 'deafinately' to 'definately,' etc.)


Hey, if everyone would read my user title.


So far as the english as a second or third language people, I would think they are always welcome, also. But it is a primarily english speaking site, so while they should certainly be considered, they are in the vast minority among users and I'm sure they understand that. So IMO they don't have to be catered to in any particular way, as I'm sure primarily Indian or Chinese or Spanish speaking sites of a similar nature don't bend over backward or make policy based on what few english speaking users are around.

Damrod and I seem to be doing fine reviewing in English. At least, I think so.

Gorki's biography is in Dutch, though, so some people don't even bother using English. Eh.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I think you need to read mine.

[morrissey]

In reference to the language barrier: I have no problem going that extra mile to help people who speak a different language, and neither do the other mods. I know I would appreciate the help and guidance if I was trying to post on a German or French website. But those situations are the exception rather than the rule. The worst of the grammar problems come from 12-year olds writing stream-of-conscious, and then not bothering to proofread. They just need to be reminded that spellchecks to exist, but they're perfectly capable of doing things right. It is the people who actually need the assistance that will get it.

[superpeer]

I think you need to read mine.

To emphasise the inferiority of mine? :upset:


In reference to the language barrier: I have no problem going that extra mile to help people who speak a different language, and neither do the other mods. I know I would appreciate the help and guidance if I was trying to post on a German or French website. But those situations are the exception rather than the rule. The worst of the grammar problems come from 12-year olds writing stream-of-conscious, and then not bothering to proofread. They just need to be reminded that spellchecks to exist, but they're perfectly capable of doing things right. It is the people who actually need the assistance that will get it.

The thing is though, a big part of foreigners on the internet speak enough English to get around a site and few English speaking users know enough of a different language to get around on a non-English site. That's the big difference, so it's hardly an issue, really.

Translations never hurt though.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I've lost count of how many times I've told people their review would actually be quite good if they'd spent five minutes correcting the basic errors, nevermind fine-tuning it. I'd have no problem helping people out in French or German, but luckily I'll never have to because Jens and Morriss can do it for me :-D

To emphasise the inferiority of mine? :upset:
Does it even need emphasising? :-D

[superpeer]

I hate you. :(

[Dave de Sylvia]

Turn that frown upside down :)

[JohnXDoe]

Damrod and I seem to be doing fine reviewing in English.
Ah, so that's what Damrod is speaking. :)

[superpeer]

Don't make fun of the German, they'll invade you.

Turn that frown upside down

(:


Did I do it right?

[RandyfromPennywise]

In reference to the language barrier: I have no problem going that extra mile to help people who speak a different language, and neither do the other mods. I know I would appreciate the help and guidance if I was trying to post on a German or French website. But those situations are the exception rather than the rule. The worst of the grammar problems come from 12-year olds writing stream-of-conscious, and then not bothering to proofread. They just need to be reminded that spellchecks to exist, but they're perfectly capable of doing things right. It is the people who actually need the assistance that will get it.
Couldn't agree more. For an example of second-language English speakers posting reviews, see the review of Pennywise's album About Time. It was posted by a German guy, and he went out of his way to apologise for the mistakes and the like at the outset of the review. As it turned out he was a lot easier to understand than many others, Americans or English (or even Australians? :eek: ), the only thing was some expressions and the like. I could help out with some French, but yeah like Morrissey is saying, the big problems aren't from those who have trouble speaking the language, it's from those who won't take the time to type it properly.

[pixiesfanyo]

I think instead of professional reviews, there should be "SPUTNIK SPONSORED" reviewers. Maybe a different name, but basically a group of 5 or 10 reviewers who opinions and review choice are highly linked with the ethics of the site.

[Shadows]

I think reviewers should all start writing in their native language.

[superpeer]

But then no one will read mine. =(

[masada]

I don't think anyone speaks fluent Awesome here as I do.

baahh =(

[Jom]

Put it through Babelfish! :p

EDIT: that was for Jelle.

[Iluvatar]

When Babelfish tries to understand his awesome speak, it just cries.

[masada]

tears of joy, really

[superpeer]

Put it through Babelfish! :p

EDIT: that was for Jelle.

Babelvis zou nog geen goeie vertaling teweeg kunnen brengen als die zich door zijn vissige oogkassen zou boren. :[


Mijn eerste ... review:

Blablabla goed blablabla muziek blablabla



See, it would suck. =[

[masada]

seems entertaining to me

it's like turning it to the spanish channel ,putting it on mute, and then making up the dialogue yourself

[Killtacular]

I like the Spanish channel. It's awesome on the rare occasion I understand what they're saying. I wish I spoke fluent Spanish. It's the third manliest language ever (German > English > Spanish).