Reply to Re: Another review rant
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
You tell us to get the reviewing standard a bit higher, but you're implying that good reviews should be upgraded to excellent reviews? Interesting...
If staff members are judging reviews solely based on length, then I believe they should change their standards a bit. That's my two cents, anyway.
A "good" review isn't very difficult to write, going by our standards. Discuss a few things you liked/disliked about a D-Mod, and as long as it makes sense, is somewhat legible, and isn't pathetically short, it's probably going to be passed.
An "excellent" review -- by my standards, anyway -- is tougher to achieve. It should be lengthy enough that it details the many aspects of the D-Mod, as we've already implied. In addition, it should also demonstrate a strong grasp of proper spelling and grammar concepts, which a lot of your cited reviews don't possess. I'm not necessarily looking for absolute perfection - I'd wager none of us can achieve that - but obvious mistakes should be minimal. Yes, I know that not everyone here speaks English as their primary language, but I feel that we can maintain this standard without having a total absence of excellent reviews (plus, "Excellent Reviews From People Who Speak English as a Second Language" would be silly). Finally, the chosen score should be clearly justified and not just yanked out of the reviewer's butt (not to imply there's a special equation that produces the score.. that'd be a bit ridiculous).
I may have forgotten a few of the standards I hold for excellent reviews; if so, I'll edit this post later on. I hope this explains a bit about why certain reviews are categorized in certain ways.
One final note: We'd be screwed if we "hired" someone to write reviews, given how frequently the collective staff writes articles.
If staff members are judging reviews solely based on length, then I believe they should change their standards a bit. That's my two cents, anyway.
A "good" review isn't very difficult to write, going by our standards. Discuss a few things you liked/disliked about a D-Mod, and as long as it makes sense, is somewhat legible, and isn't pathetically short, it's probably going to be passed.
An "excellent" review -- by my standards, anyway -- is tougher to achieve. It should be lengthy enough that it details the many aspects of the D-Mod, as we've already implied. In addition, it should also demonstrate a strong grasp of proper spelling and grammar concepts, which a lot of your cited reviews don't possess. I'm not necessarily looking for absolute perfection - I'd wager none of us can achieve that - but obvious mistakes should be minimal. Yes, I know that not everyone here speaks English as their primary language, but I feel that we can maintain this standard without having a total absence of excellent reviews (plus, "Excellent Reviews From People Who Speak English as a Second Language" would be silly). Finally, the chosen score should be clearly justified and not just yanked out of the reviewer's butt (not to imply there's a special equation that produces the score.. that'd be a bit ridiculous).
I may have forgotten a few of the standards I hold for excellent reviews; if so, I'll edit this post later on. I hope this explains a bit about why certain reviews are categorized in certain ways.
One final note: We'd be screwed if we "hired" someone to write reviews, given how frequently the collective staff writes articles.
