Was this well written?

[Cocaine]

I cant reply in the Change Log thread so I have a quick question in regards to this:

Feel free to discuss this. I think that at this point they better be well written, or they wouldn't be staff.

So does this take effect starting with the next Staff review, because I still see it? And does this essentially just erase the ranking/approval rating? All pretty trivial stuff, I'm just curious.

[planewreck]

Have no answer to question, but this is a pretty good idea. Will stop all that bullshit negging because some fanboy doesn't agree with a well-written staff review's rating.

Jealous though. :upset:

[Cocaine]

Yeah, I'm just wondering how it's going to affect site ranking (which I think should be removed anyways) and approval ratings. Especially since already posted Staff reviews seem to still have the voting system enabled (Ie: I just pos'd Hanson's latest review).

[mx]

I'm working on disabling it as we speak

[Cocaine]

Awesome. So how will it effect the things I mentioned, if at all?

[planewreck]

No more negging for Low Level Flight!

And this is off-topic, but when did the font for band names in reviews change, or am I just now noticing it?

[Cocaine]

:cool:

Iluvaterz new review got negged for virtually no reason just now, too.

[mx]

I've removed the 2 out of 4 stuff. Do you also want me to remove voting for staff reviews?

Cocaine, haven't decided on the complete system yet

EDIT: And yes, that's a trial font. More of a magazine style

[Cocaine]

I've removed the 2 out of 4 stuff. Do you also want me to remove voting for staff reviews?

Well, if you're going on the idea that all staff reviews should and most likely are well written it'd probably be cool to do, but I'd maybe post something in the staff section and see what people say? Or in the general sputnik section, or whatever.

[planewreck]

All gone! Low Level Flight (and everything Flawed writes) is now universally loved, naysayers or not.


edit: nevermind

[The Jungler]

Meh, not too sure about this, but I don't get many fanboy negs so I don't know.

[Sepstrup]

Do staff reviews get priority when there are several reviews of an album? They definitely should.

[FlawedPerfection]

All gone! Low Level Flight (and everything Flawed writes) is now universally loved, naysayers or not.

Haha, what?

Anyway, this is a good idea, but I think if we do this something needs to be done about the ranking system. It doesn't look good if the staff members fall down to lower rankings than the general population.

Edit: Maybe it should say "staff" or "approved" next to ranking rather than a number.

[Cocaine]

Maybe it should say "staff" or "approved" next to ranking rather than a number.
Yeah, or just remove the ranks. I don't understand how they work, seriously, I've been ranked the same since my like, 40th review.

[Channing]

yes more exclusive site features for the staff even though the title supposedly means nothing

how about getting rid of the ones who don't do ****

[mx]

The title doesn't mean 'nothing'. Staff reviewers are regularly featured on metacritic and linked from prominent sites. There are separate staff features.

[Liberi Fatali]

I don't like this move personally, I don't feel above the system.

[Cocaine]

I think the system isn't really necessary anyways. If a review isn't well written, chances are a better one will surface and will take it's place as the flagged review. And the ranking seems unnecessary.

[Dave de Sylvia]

yes more exclusive site features for the staff even though the title supposedly means nothing

how about getting rid of the ones who don't do ****
How does removing a feature qualify as an exclusive site feature? The well-written rating is a gauge for people to develop their own self-confidence. I have way too much of that already.

[Oddsen]

I'm not sure if its better this way or not, but I defenitely agree with taking out the ranking system then.

[Zebra]

I think we should get rid of the feature all together. Everytime someone gets negged all they do is complain about it and then one of the mods winds up deleting the neg anyway.

but that's just my opinion.

[Cesar21]

I think it might be fair to do with a review neg the same thing its done with a rep neg in the forum. If you are going to neg a review make it mandatory to at least leave a litle message in wich the person can explain why they did it. That should clear up most complains, and will bring down the amount of undeserved neggin.

[GleamInRanks]

You could also mandate a quotation from the review as an example of why it was written poorly.

[Eliminator]

No. get rid of it altogether. it's pointless.

[JohnXDoe]

i never did like the whole "was this review well written" thing. i simply don't know what it means and it can be somewhat subjective. my grammar and relaxed way of reviewing has sometimes been brought into question by some for some of my reviews, and yet others will leave comments that are positive or give me a thumbs up for the same reviews being well written. in the end i prefer when someone simply leaves something constructive to say, and while i used to get irked by a neg vote lately i just don't care. my lack of apostrophes in certain places still takes a beating sometimes (which stems from the MS Word bug of '06 :( ) but i've been minding those better lately.

i say get rid of the "well written" thing for staff only for other staff members who deserve better then neg's for nice reviews and the fact that i'm on staff and the feature has always annoyed me. :p so far as the community in general, i dunno? but my feeling is if a person thinks one way or another on a review let them make some effort and leave remarks in the comments section. the little click of the mouse on yes or no is a bit too easy. although for newcomers the feature could be helpful at first. so maybe it can be a feature up until your 20th review and then shut it off. or 25th, etc...

the rest of the stuff, rankings and blah blah blah? meh....idc tbqh

[AlienEater]

was this well written is a poorly worded question and should really be gotten rid of

[JohnXDoe]

^ that was really well written :D

[JumpTheF**kUp]

Just get rid of it. I see too many people nowadays that write crap reviews but are under the influence that they write like Shakespeare, simply because people are too nice to them and vote 'yes' (also happens in fear of revenge). Getting rid of it will encourage more people to speak their mind and criticise (hopefully constructively) and not give false hope to people who can't write for bollocks.

Get rid of approved reviewers as well, mostly because being tagged as approved doesn't do anything whatsoever.

Oh, and change around the staff a bit more pls, so that the people on there actually write reviews. Half of the staff reviewers aren't even around anymore, whereas some people who write reviews almost daily aren't being recognised (here's lookin' at you trust).

[Iluvatar]

You have to be a tried and true reviewer, plus be of extremely high quality (supposedly). Trust will probably get on there in a few months or so.
I like the yes/no system, but oh well.

[JumpTheF**kUp]

Maybe once a reviewer hits 30-50 he/she should be made staff?

Or maybe there should be a poll in the forum to decide if someone gets in.

[Iluvatar]

No, mx has to personally decide now that staffers are officially recognized reviewers on metacritic and such. More factors than just the number of reviews to take into account.

[JumpTheF**kUp]

Yeah I realised how retarded that was after I remembered Acey had > 50 reviews.

What's metacritic?

[Iluvatar]

www.metacritic.com

Its kind of a gateway review sites. Links to established review sites. Our staff reviews get posted there for new releases.

[Cocaine]

Metacritic is one of the more important rating sites, it's up there with AllMusic and AllMovie. Only they only seem to include one out of ever 300 releases.