|
|
Forums - News / General |
For General modelling or hobby-related topics that are not covered by any other specific forum. Please keep to topics concerning the hobby. |
| Topics | 2965 |
| Messages | 21987 |
|
|
| Subject: | Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings |  |
| Date: | Mar 9, 2005 |
| From: | Steve Frost | |
To be as succinct as possible:
- Scrap the stars, numbers, etc. They don't do much for me personally, and removing them forces people to read the review and make a judgment for themselves. It also requires the reviewer to put more effort into the review and less witty banter and the like. Despite my earlier comments about his _current_ style, I do like Cookie Sewell's Reccomended/Not Reccomended, etc. type ratings, if a rating system is required.
- Limit In Box Reviews to a handful of sentences at most. They only speak to things such as the quality of the molding, presentation of instructions (as opposed to how good the instructions are to build the kit) and nothing as to the buildability or fit of parts. In short, I find them the least beneficial of all review types, and as such, I think they should be limited in scope. In a perfect world, in-box reviews could be "built" by a webform with checkboxes for options like "Ejector Pin Marks on parts? Y or N; Flash on parts? Y or N", and a comments section for BRIEF descriptions. In a perfect world...
- The editing and commenting features for reviews here at TL are excellent, and should be an industry standard everywhere. If the comments, praises, and criticisms are true in a review, they'll easily pass muster against the flawed "I don't like it because it's not good" level of commentary. |
| |
|
|
 | Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Paul A. Owen - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . "Or are the reviewers just plain wrong?" - Steve Campbell - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Paul A. Owen - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Sean Lynch - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Paul A. Owen - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Ed Bouwmeester - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Paul A. Owen - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Steve Frost - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - gene fong - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Belly buttons? - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Belly buttons? - Steve Frost - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Belly buttons? - Paul A. Owen - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Formal Warning! - Steve Campbell - Mar 10, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - David Manning - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Yeah, I like this idea - Kevin Johnson - Mar 10, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Veli-Pekka Pelttari - Mar 8, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Peter Ong - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - terry li - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Extra stars - Leo Lee - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Steve Frost - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Stars are OK - Kurt Laughlin - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Stars are OK - Paul A. Owen - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Hey lates review the reviewers!?! - Billy Bishop (Michael Wawrow) - Mar 9, 2005 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Stars are OK - Steve Frost - Mar 11, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - adam lehmann - Mar 10, 2005 |
| . . . Well, I had one experience where.... - Mark Fergel - Mar 10, 2005 |
| . . . . . . Re: Well, I had one experience where.... - gene fong - Mar 10, 2005 |
| . . . Re: Reviews - Too Many High Ratings - Late Reply - Doug Chaltry - Mar 11, 2005 |
|
|
