Delayed New Topic in Website Reviews?

  • lioness
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1615

Post 3+ Months Ago

There are quite a number of users starting to register here and posting their site for review the same day. At the time of this post 3 of the top 7 sites up for review were posted on the same day as the user registered, one other site was posted the day after someone signed up.

Often, these users post 3 scrappy reviews of other member's sites just to fulfill the requirement - in their eyes. However reviews in the Website Review forum are getting less and less helpful to the owner of the website in question.

Would it be possible to delay permissions for a set time (say 2 weeks) to create a New Topic in Website Reviews, or perhaps have it so that a mod reviews the 3 reviews by a poster and only grants 'New Topic' status there once the reviews meet the requirements and are unique from one another?

A lot of genuine posters are seeing their threads fall way down the board to a place were they are not as likely to get responses, while these 'newbies' hog al the top spots in the forum...

Doesn't seem fair that.
  • joebert
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

That sounds like a plan to me.

Posting a review, for review, to see if it's reviewable.

*sniff*
I smell redundancy.
*sniff* wait a second, that's not redundancy, that's my *beep beep beep*
  • lioness
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1615

Post 3+ Months Ago

I did offer an alternative :? anyhoo
  • joebert
  • Genius
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13511
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

The way it is doesn't make someones' review depend on the schedule of 613flavah or the rest of the moderators though.

More people should just report the bunk reviews with that anonymous report button.
You might be supprized how effective that little red exclamation button is. :D

I think the moderator team getting their heads together to hand pick a few new team mates would be more effective than a programatic (sometimes problematic) solution.

I'm not trying to put you down ulstermonkey, I just know what it feels like when someone suggests replacing the job you do with a program. ;)
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23473
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

That forum is problematic to say the least. I know we've had discussions in the past on requiring a certain number of posts before a user can post in that forum. I can't remember if that was nixed or forgotten. The thing is, the folks whose posts keep "scrolling down" because of newbie day old posts most likely than not did the same things themselves. Unfortunately, the reviews forum doesn't get much attention by real regulars because it's a tad bit annoying at times.

On the other hand, if it wasn't for the 3 post rule Bigwebmaster established, most of those sites wouldn't even get reviewed.

It's a dilemna.
  • meman
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 3431
  • Loc: London Town , Apples and pears and all that crap

Post 3+ Months Ago

i would say the minimum posts idea and the 3 reviews rule combined would be best.

like atno said most regular members don't read it, and i can't imagine that forum attracts much search engine taffic for the forum, plus most of the siites posted there aren't really looking for reviews, thhey are looking for traffic. I haven't looked, but i would bet very few of the sites have been changed based on the reviews they get.
  • lioness
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1615

Post 3+ Months Ago

ATNO/TW wrote:
On the other hand, if it wasn't for the 3 post rule Bigwebmaster established, most of those sites wouldn't even get reviewed.


They are often not musch use though "no... its OK... seen worse :)" by ama (joined today ;))

meman wrote:
i would say the minimum posts idea and the 3 reviews rule combined would be best.

like atno said most regular members don't read it, and i can't imagine that forum attracts much search engine taffic for the forum, plus most of the siites posted there aren't really looking for reviews, thhey are looking for traffic. I haven't looked, but i would bet very few of the sites have been changed based on the reviews they get.


That's the way the forum is headed. There have been so many Links Directories and Hosting companies of late it is sickening.

I just remember when posters used the site for its intended purpose. When they were genuinely looking for critique, and used it to improve their sites. And the critique was thorough, and went beyond design to syantax and markup! It is these posters who I feel sorry for, I know myself from when I started out how useful this feedback was. I just wish I had the thread-locking/unlocking capability in that forum :(
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23473
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Part of the solution is for regular members who do know what they are doing is to get in there and post reviews. I can admit to personally being defunct on this.

Regular members that know and understand web design should be easily able to decipher the genuine requests from the bogus ones.

If more members would post top knotch critical reviews the forum would head in the direction I think you'd like to see it go. I will do my best to getting some more review time under my belt. I have another couple weeks before I'll have much spare "freed up" time to do things like that but as soon as I do I'll take a good look at it.

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 8 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
 

© 1998-2016. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.

 
 
 
http://www.ozzu.com/suggestions-comments/delayed-new-topic-website-reviews-t66400.html
www.ozzu.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-50
29579
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:RPJZRNNUBQY5CJBIZP23YMDPC2WVC72M
<urn:uuid:25e2e35f-2484-47c6-a2ac-44b8dabfde00>
2016-12-10T03:20:00Z
108.163.216.218
sha1:AG4QYGPYWTLP4EWE6W4NX5UFIIK3MBY2
<urn:uuid:d55ec8c2-6c39-4902-b6e9-2f7abeeefd0b>
http://www.ozzu.com/suggestions-comments/delayed-new-topic-website-reviews-t66400.html
length
response
<urn:uuid:60d79dc7-4eb5-4e1c-954d-238a68c723d0>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-31-129-80.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-50
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for November 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf