Reply to Re: reveiws: mini Vs Full problems
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
: I know this has been discussed before, but i really think that there should be some sort of word count score for full vs. mini reveiws.
: i don't think that this will prompt people to purposefully write one word over teh limit, and anyway, so what if they do? It's better than your score constantly changing, every tiem you resubmit a reveiw, becaus e a staff member decided that this time it was a mini review, whereas last tiem it was a full one. Staff should still validate reviews, just not decide whether they are full or mini reviews.
: what do you all think?
Word/character count is stupid. I can almost guarantee people would do the bare minimum, and add some BS in the review just to make it full.
Though, that does happen somewhat... with some reviews that just seem to have filler that is totally unrelated with the file.
And a review for, say, Bloop the Fish could be considered a Full review with only 300 words (complete guess) as there simply isn't much to review... whereas a full review for an Epic better by quite a bit more.
Also, Full reviews and mini reviews don't just have to do with the number of words... they have to do with the quality. For example, I'm thinking of joshriot's review of FIAT right now. I don't think it had one single capital letter in the entire thing... but it was still a good review and long. But it was set as mini.
I'm open to other suggestions outside of word count... perhaps a completely different validation system outside of full/mini. But I can't think of one.
: i don't think that this will prompt people to purposefully write one word over teh limit, and anyway, so what if they do? It's better than your score constantly changing, every tiem you resubmit a reveiw, becaus e a staff member decided that this time it was a mini review, whereas last tiem it was a full one. Staff should still validate reviews, just not decide whether they are full or mini reviews.
: what do you all think?
Word/character count is stupid. I can almost guarantee people would do the bare minimum, and add some BS in the review just to make it full.
Though, that does happen somewhat... with some reviews that just seem to have filler that is totally unrelated with the file.
And a review for, say, Bloop the Fish could be considered a Full review with only 300 words (complete guess) as there simply isn't much to review... whereas a full review for an Epic better by quite a bit more.
Also, Full reviews and mini reviews don't just have to do with the number of words... they have to do with the quality. For example, I'm thinking of joshriot's review of FIAT right now. I don't think it had one single capital letter in the entire thing... but it was still a good review and long. But it was set as mini.
I'm open to other suggestions outside of word count... perhaps a completely different validation system outside of full/mini. But I can't think of one.
