Reply to Re: Future Review Updates and Such
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
: I'm currently thinking of dumping the Full/Mini review system... sorta. Just the designation of a review as full or mini seems to imply that the length is the only motive behind a Full review. While this is true to a limited extent (other factors do play a role), I think I may have a better idea for Miasma v2.
: There will be a division between "Excellent" and "Good" reviews, rather than Full/Mini. An Excellent review would have certain guidelines that must be met, and a Good review would have slightly lower guidelines.
: For example, an Excellent Review might have to have the following:
: * Well thought out, original review.
: * Discusses things pertinant to the review, doesn't include things that are questionable. Like comparing FIAT to the WWF or something.
: * Touches on more than a couple virtues/flaws in the D-Mod, and backs them up with ample 'proof'.
: * Ideas are presented in a clear and concise manner.
: * Grammar and spelling should be good... they don't have to be perfect. But capital letters at the start of sentences, punctuation, etc. are expected.
: A Good review would have at least:
: * Provides a general response to why the author gave it the rating they did. "I liked it because..." and then a few sentences will do it.
: * As for Grammar and Spelling... it should be in english, and easily understood. If it just doesn't make any sense, then it wouldn't be accepted.
: There would be cases where reviews go far above that required of a Good review, but just don't match the requirements of an Excellent review... so for those who are thinking that going just a little better than the Good review guidelines would get them an Excellent rating, nah.
That's a good idea, but wouldn't that be subjective? Grammar and punctuation of course can be measured, but finding something good or excellent not, as, for example, the reviews show since some rate a file good and others excellent.
I do like the part of: '* Provides a general response to why the author gave it the rating they did. "I liked it because..." and then a few sentences will do it.' I think I will add that in future.
: There will be a division between "Excellent" and "Good" reviews, rather than Full/Mini. An Excellent review would have certain guidelines that must be met, and a Good review would have slightly lower guidelines.
: For example, an Excellent Review might have to have the following:
: * Well thought out, original review.
: * Discusses things pertinant to the review, doesn't include things that are questionable. Like comparing FIAT to the WWF or something.
: * Touches on more than a couple virtues/flaws in the D-Mod, and backs them up with ample 'proof'.
: * Ideas are presented in a clear and concise manner.
: * Grammar and spelling should be good... they don't have to be perfect. But capital letters at the start of sentences, punctuation, etc. are expected.
: A Good review would have at least:
: * Provides a general response to why the author gave it the rating they did. "I liked it because..." and then a few sentences will do it.
: * As for Grammar and Spelling... it should be in english, and easily understood. If it just doesn't make any sense, then it wouldn't be accepted.
: There would be cases where reviews go far above that required of a Good review, but just don't match the requirements of an Excellent review... so for those who are thinking that going just a little better than the Good review guidelines would get them an Excellent rating, nah.
That's a good idea, but wouldn't that be subjective? Grammar and punctuation of course can be measured, but finding something good or excellent not, as, for example, the reviews show since some rate a file good and others excellent.
I do like the part of: '* Provides a general response to why the author gave it the rating they did. "I liked it because..." and then a few sentences will do it.' I think I will add that in future.
