Reviews (Programmer Edition)

[DreamOfRen]

Hello,
I was thinking on ways that the review system could be "fixed" to prevent griefing and I'd like to share my ideas. What inspired this was a recent profile post and recounting my own experiences.

I had a reviewer once who checked out my stories. I got a 4.3 of 5. Not bad right?
Except... The reviewer said a ton of misleading and at times, outright lies about my fiction. It was almost as if they never read it at all. Even when I messaged them about it, they doubled down and refused to budge.

Only when confronted with their review and the facts side to side did they switch up stances. Also, it was only after this was revealed publicly for others to see.

In other words, they used a "good" review to justify their bias. This is a pretty common tactic for people who just want to snub others openly. The main issue is, you can't fight someone's "feelings" because they aren't rooted in logic or reality at times. What's more, bias doesn't always mean accurate (or inaccurate). To this end, this is what I'd like to propose.

Largely, it comes with 5 features.

1. Force raters to leave a written review with a necessary word count minimum. Urge them to explain their review and why.
2. Raters must choose 1 of 2 options when posting their review (Opinion Or Objective). This gets them to commit to declaring their review as one or the other. This should also be mandatory when it comes to leaving a review. This way, if they just felt like writing whatever they want, good or bad, we know. Likewise, if they leave an opinionated review but label it objective--it's obvious.
3. Allow authors and readers to mark reviews as "accurate" or "inaccurate" in response.
4. Allow authors and readers to also public vote on whether a review is (Opinion Or Objective). Steps 3 and 4 are to allow readers to make better informed decisions by not allowing any one party (authors or reviewers) to control the narrative.
5. Allow authors to directly reply back to a review (just one answer which can only be edited for each review).

Reasons I suggest this:

• Ideally all of these changes will serve the purpose of allowing readers themselves to discern whether a reviewer is just up to tomfoolery.
• This one is optional, but you could also give readers reviewer status "well known reviewer" for their work as well, and show the Opinion / Objective ratio on their profiles as such. This way readers would know if a reviewer leans towards Opinion or Objectivity.
• Currently the ability to rate and review is too one sided, as reviewers can leave any rating they want and they don't have to worry about..well...anything. The only real way to fix this is to create a system that at the least, examines the ratings and reviews.

I'm not sure how much work or how feasible this would be, and I may just be thinking too much like a programmer to "patch" problems. But this is what I came up with. Thoughts?

 

[yansusustories]

Several thoughts, actually. And, unfortunately, I have to say that I disagree with most stuff. One by one:

Raters must choose 1 of 2 options when posting their review (Opinion Or Objective)

There is no such thing as an 'objective' review because even some facts can be interpreted differently and many things to take into consideration for a review can't even be called facts. E.g., think something like the MC's personality: People might have different interpretations of that.

Allow authors and readers to mark reviews as "accurate" or "inaccurate" in response.

As much as I hate to say this, but authors and loyal fans will just mark any bad reviews as 'inaccurate' to make them appear less valuable to new readers. Any trust we might have in the review system would be destroyed.

Allow authors to directly reply back to a review (just one answer which can only be edited for each review)

I actually do like this point but I don't think it should be limited to authors if it is implemented. I can see how this might be a problematic feature though in that there might be discussions that detract from the actual review. Maybe have it hide-able? In the worst case, there might also be flame-wars below the reviews because people can't accept stuff.

give readers reviewer status "well known reviewer"

I do support this unequivocally.


In general: If somebody says stuff about your novel in the review that just isn't true, you can report the review and state what is wrong with it. If whoever checks the complaints finds out that it's true, it'll be redacted and the reader has to change it as far as I am aware.

 

[Moonpearl]

If a review is truly inaccurate, you can report it. If it's just that the reader perceived something differently from how you wanted them to, that's unfortunately tough luck. Sometimes you don't write what you think you wrote, or certain people won't understand it - that's an inherent struggle of writing and not something that we're going to fix with rules.

Reviews are never just objective or opinionated. If a reviewer is writing anything that will mean something to other readers, it's going to be both. Forcing people to choose would be unnatural and too constraining.

If people want to rate without reviewing, they won't be forced into writing one just so they can do it. You'll just get next to nobody rating anything.

As for the "accurate" vs "inaccurate" thing, we already have the ability to "like" reviews. That's really all potential readers need if they want to take other people's opinions on it into perspective.

And giving authors more space to respond to reviews (which are intended for potential readers, not the author) is a recipe for disaster. Authors can be very, very touchy and defensive people. New authors especially are infamous for being petty and vengeful towards people who don't like their work.
Despite what you might think, reviewers who are willing to write anything negative about a work in their review are bravely risking insane authors invading their inboxes to scream at them.

On that note, negative reviews aren't always a negative thing. Potential readers tend to like to read both positive and negative reviews in order to balance the opinions they're receiving and make a more informed decision about whether or not a novel's for them. If there's only positive reviews, they have to decide to take a chance on the novel based on the understanding that there might be major problems that nobody's flagged up.
They'll also assess whether or not a certain review is credible or applicable to their own preferences.

In addition to that, readers who notice a negative review on a work that they like are far more likely to write a positive counter-review, to try and stop other potential readers from being put off.

So we don't need to place unnecessary restrictions on reviewers, we just need more people writing reviews.

 

[K5Rakitan]

I'd rather not force raters to leave a review because I enjoy collecting 1-star ratings on this platform. Different platforms have different cultures/flavors, and I like the way Scribble Hub works. I get plenty of reviews on writing.com. While I would enjoy having a few more reviews here on Scribble Hub, I understand that many people don't want their names associated with a controversial story like mine.

 

[DreamOfRen]

I figured the replies would mostly be negative.
But then again, most people have a problem with being held accountable for well...anything.

From that perspective it seems like an idea I will be able to use when I start up my own service.

Thanks for the feedback

 

[yansusustories]

I figured the replies would mostly be negative.
But then again, most people have a problem with being held accountable for well...anything.

In other words, you are assuming all of us are just writing bad, unfounded reviews and that is why we shot down your great idea?

 

[DreamOfRen]

Several thoughts, actually. And, unfortunately, I have to say that I disagree with most stuff. One by one:

There is no such thing as an 'objective' review because even some facts can be interpreted differently and many things to take into consideration for a review can't even be called facts. E.g., think something like the MC's personality: People might have different interpretations of that.

That's actually false. Many people are capable of making objective decisions and reviews. People do it everyday, its only when their emotions get called into the mix that it becomes a problem. This is why entertainment can be inflamatory.

Facts can't be interpreted differently, because they are facts. What you're misconstruing as such is bias, which means you may not understand the true nature of bias. Any fact that can be interpreted differently aren't presenting the whole picture. I can think of dozens of examples on this.

It's literally why morons like to argue whether masks help during a pandemic. They do, point blank. There is no room for debate, because its simply not true that masks fail to help the issue. Same with social distancing and so on.

The second example of this is crime, particularly black on black crime. There is this notion that blacks are violent and dangerous because they make up a smaller percentage of the population while making up a larger percentage of people being placed in jail. Taken on its own from numbers and statistics, it looks convincing. That is until you realize that crime rates are related to poverty, and poverty in the U.S. is systematically enforced through various means to willfully incapacitate ethnic groups like natives and african americans.

Further enforced by BIAS of the public and police, who regularly arrest people of color for things that aren't even crimes many times. This is done specifically to inflate the first set of numbers, thereby making the ill informed feel "justified" in the way they view the police. This has been going on for almost 200 years, in fact the idea of "police" was formed to catch run away slaves. Did you know that?

The same "offenses" that people of European descent get a slap on the wrist for are harshly criticized or worse for POC. Example : RIOTING. Groups of white people have sabotaged movements, destroyed hundreds of thousands of dollars in store fronts and crippled business all in the last 3 weeks. You haven't heard a peep about it because, well..they aren't dark skinned. This happened as recently as just last week.

Your mindset sets a totally beneficial and completely biased framework in place where people should be forgiven for not acting objectively in situations of authority. Even if they do mess up, there should be no repercussions--right? That is, unless someone *else* messes up. Ironically enough, I doubt you'd be okay with being mistreated in such a situation by such people if you were on the opposite end.

Objectiveness isn't a lost art, people simply do what they want without accountability, which is what these suggested changes aim to circumvent. Creating a system that helps enforce objectivity even a little bit is the only way to fix the issue.

As much as I hate to say this, but authors and loyal fans will just mark any bad reviews as 'inaccurate' to make them appear less valuable to new readers. Any trust we might have in the review system would be destroyed.

Even if it happens, the point of having them purposely mark their intent is so that people can make better informed decisions. In other words, this is exactly why I suggested it -- it becomes easier to see who's just full of it. By having them state their intent it becomes easier to see if they are just biased or at least attempting to stick to the content at hand.

I actually do like this point but I don't think it should be limited to authors if it is implemented. I can see how this might be a problematic feature though in that there might be discussions that detract from the actual review. Maybe have it hide-able? In the worst case, there might also be flame-wars below the reviews because people can't accept stuff.

I get your point but it would be minimized if at all. Simply because you'd be editing a single message not a chain if that makes sense.

In general: If somebody says stuff about your novel in the review that just isn't true, you can report the review and state what is wrong with it. If whoever checks the complaints finds out that it's true, it'll be redacted and the reader has to change it as far as I am aware.

That just creates more work for moderators. Why not fix the problem at the source?

 

[DreamOfRen]

In other words, you are assuming all of us are just writing bad, unfounded reviews and that is why we shot down your great idea?

Not at all. I'm assuming that you just don't like to be held accountable for your mistakes--as most people do not.
Was I unclear when I said that above?

Also just to be clear, I don't have a problem with bad reviews. I have plenty of downrates, 1 ratings, etc that I've never disputed or cared to address.
This suggested change isn't about getting good reviews, it's about stepping closer to the truth of things.

 

[yansusustories]

Why not fix the problem at the source?

Because - and that was my whole point - who decides which are the "facts" (there, I'll put it in quotation marks for you) in regards to a novel?

Your whole idea rests on an idea of bias as well: The reader writing the review will have to make a biased decision of whether their review is objective or an opinion, the readers marking it will also have to make a decision based on what they know and perceive which will also be biased. All humans are biased.

My example for the "facts" was the MC's personality because what one person sees as 'cold' might not be what another person sees as cold based on their own personality, the personality of the people they grew up, their culture, etc. That's a bias they have. So the review that they write in which they include the MC's personality as what they assume is a fact will, in fact, be biased already and thus can't be objective anymore.
Maybe I did not phrase it well enough in my original response but that was the whole point I was trying to make. Many - I might even argue most - things in a review are unable to be objectively judged. Unless you only want people to write a summary with 'MC did x, y, z, and the story also contains a, b, c'. But maybe that's how you'd want a review to be?

Edit because I missed the second one:

Not at all. I'm assuming that you just don't like to be held accountable for your mistakes--as most people do not.

Actually, I would say I do. Because only if people are held accountable, there's a chance to grow. Maybe I'd feel bad about making the mistake in the first place. But for being held accountable? Nah. That's a good thing. We should do that stuff more.

 

[DreamOfRen]

Because - and that was my whole point - who decides which are the "facts" (there, I'll put it in quotation marks for you) in regards to a novel?

The point was never to decide what's true and what's not. If that's the take away, then I feel you've missed the point entirely (even though it was clearly stated in the OP). The point is to create a review system that better informs potential readers about whether or not reviews are biased or objective.

There should be no problem with that in theory.

our whole idea rests on an idea of bias as well: The reader writing the review will have to make a biased decision of whether their review is objective or an opinion, the readers marking it will also have to make a decision based on what they know and perceive which will also be biased. All humans are biased.

It's called a "choice". You can spin it in any way you like, but the reality is it kind of sounds like you just want to maintain the ability to be able to deceive others. It's the only logical reason you'd argue against a system that allows others to see discrepencies.

If your freedom is to be able to misinform others if you feel inclined, my freedom is to be able to point that out and circumvent it.
Who says your freedoms Obama's mine? At best, it just means that both system should exist or neither should.

Either way, the notion that I'm tackling this the wrong way doesn't hold weight.

 

[yansusustories]

You can spin it in any way you like, but the reality is it kind of sounds like you just want to maintain the ability to be able to deceive others. It's the only logical reason you'd argue against a system that allows others to see discrepencies.

No, I just disagree with you.
And that is because I don't think the system you have proposed would be able to better inform any readers. I think I've already explained at length why. To reiterate though: I don't think you can make the distinction between an objective or an opinion review because the review and judgments of the review rely on already biased readers. (Edit: Which I think the current system already allows pretty well with people liking a review if they agree with it. Maybe an added dislike function to express not-agreeing would be nice.)

Also, how about, instead of just referring to the OP again and mentioning how it was 'clearly stated' while also saying that I 'missed the point entirely' you take the time to explain so we can have an actual discussion about this? Because it apparently wasn't clear enough if I missed the mark as much as you say I did.

 

[Angry_Clown]

You can spin it in any way you like, but the reality is it kind of sounds you want to maintain your ability to silence the reviewers that don't agree with your deluded biased line of thought. It's the only logical reason you would argue for a needlessly complicated system that allows rabid fans to effectively remove reviews from the public eye.

 

[Generic.Archdemon]

1. Force raters to leave a written review with a necessary word count minimum. Urge them to explain their review and why.
2. Raters must choose 1 of 2 options when posting their review (Opinion Or Objective). This gets them to commit to declaring their review as one or the other. This should also be mandatory when it comes to leaving a review. This way, if they just felt like writing whatever they want, good or bad, we know. Likewise, if they leave an opinionated review but label it objective--it's obvious.
3. Allow authors and readers to mark reviews as "accurate" or "inaccurate" in response.
4. Allow authors and readers to also public vote on whether a review is (Opinion Or Objective). Steps 3 and 4 are to allow readers to make better informed decisions by not allowing any one party (authors or reviewers) to control the narrative.
5. Allow authors to directly reply back to a review (just one answer which can only be edited for each review).

Sorry, I am not one of these people that "got it" right away. I would like to be more informed in order to decide which side of the fence I am leaning.

So let's say I wrote a review that I thought is objective, but was in fact an opinion, a reader comes along they would obviously vote it is opinion since it could be objectively identified as an opinion.

SO this review that used to be an objective one now an opinion, but would it be an inaccurate objective review, while being an accurate opinion review. is accuracy independent of objectivity and opinion?

Actually, how are you defining objective review and opinion reviews?

It would be super helpful if you clearly state which type of statement is an opinion and which type of statements are objective in relation not to real-life like the examples you mentioned, but rather in relation specificity to the narrative and storytelling techniques. You know for dumbasses like me.... or are readers that are too dumb to know what the difference between objective and opinion excluded from this convo...

I will ask anyway...

For example a review:

There is nothing new about this novel, it uses the 1000-year-old trope harem, there are 5 love interest and all are archetypal characters that seem to be stamped out of a factory assembly line. All the ecchi moments are just a rehash of old shit. Its just rince and repeat. Where the hell is the originality? Go write something new and stop regurgitating an anime you watch! You derivative hack!

Is this opinion or is that objective?

Surely, "nothing new" is an opinion, it is objective that there is a 5-lovers harem in the story, is it statistically accurate that 5 member harem trope is tired. there is an actual statistical number for how many 5lover harems there are since the beginning of harems, But is 5 members one new or not new is objective but if it is not new so it is bad... that's opinion?

So the first line is both? opinion and objective?

Is the character archetypal? If one of the lovers is the "little sister archetype" then that statement is objective? But, what if another person say that "Na. the little sister is a vampire that is 8000 years old" therefore not really the archetype and is in fact and original concept/deviation? The reviewer might not consider there to be any difference, the vampire talk like a "little sister" walk like a "little sister" act like"little sister", the vampireness does not get a mention at all after the initial paragraph of the novel, SO is the statement the story is not original is that opinion or objective?
...
.
.this is getting confusing

should there be a review of the reviews to check if something being objective or opinion? Because it might be my opinion that your review is an opinion, but it might be your opinion that my review is objective., or you might objectively see my opinion review as and objective,

I am so confused

Is there an objective way to identify if a review is an opinion or objective? Should there not be something like....

it is my opinion that is review is objective aka an Opinobjerev (OPOBR)
it is my objective understanding that is review is Objective, aka, an Objeobjerev (OBOBR)
it is my opinion that is review is an opinion aka an Opinopinrev (OPOPR)
it is my objective understanding that my review is an opinion aka an Objeopinrev (OBOPR)

Would that work?

It might just make everything easier to understand.

Or maybe you @DreamOfRen can
choose 3 novels

and give us 3 pairs of reviews (1 Ob and 1 Op)that way we/ I (mainly I) can understand what an objective review looks like and what an opinion review looks like.


PS.
If people have not noticed... I have not read a harem novel in a very very long time... is it still like that?
Are there still Tsunderes? Or are the kids calling them something else nowadays? Like disco lightning or something? "Oh Hikari-chan got embarrassed and punched Takashi, that is so disco lightning of her!" is that what' it's like now?

 

[yansusustories]

Actually, how are you defining objective review and opinion reviews?

I think this is what I was grappling with. One or two review examples would really be nice so we can make sure we have the same understanding of this. Because so far, I really have a difficult time imagining a completely objective review. Right now, I can't imagine that there would be much you can put in there other than an actual summary.

 

[Valmond]

Hello,
I was thinking on ways that the review system could be "fixed" to prevent griefing and I'd like to share my ideas. What inspired this was a recent profile post and recounting my own experiences.

I had a reviewer once who checked out my stories. I got a 4.3 of 5. Not bad right?
Except... The reviewer said a ton of misleading and at times, outright lies about my fiction. It was almost as if they never read it at all. Even when I messaged them about it, they doubled down and refused to budge.

Only when confronted with their review and the facts side to side did they switch up stances. Also, it was only after this was revealed publicly for others to see.

In other words, they used a "good" review to justify their bias. This is a pretty common tactic for people who just want to snub others openly. The main issue is, you can't fight someone's "feelings" because they aren't rooted in logic or reality at times. What's more, bias doesn't always mean accurate (or inaccurate). To this end, this is what I'd like to propose.

Largely, it comes with 5 features.

1. Force raters to leave a written review with a necessary word count minimum. Urge them to explain their review and why.
2. Raters must choose 1 of 2 options when posting their review (Opinion Or Objective). This gets them to commit to declaring their review as one or the other. This should also be mandatory when it comes to leaving a review. This way, if they just felt like writing whatever they want, good or bad, we know. Likewise, if they leave an opinionated review but label it objective--it's obvious.
3. Allow authors and readers to mark reviews as "accurate" or "inaccurate" in response.
4. Allow authors and readers to also public vote on whether a review is (Opinion Or Objective). Steps 3 and 4 are to allow readers to make better informed decisions by not allowing any one party (authors or reviewers) to control the narrative.
5. Allow authors to directly reply back to a review (just one answer which can only be edited for each review).

Reasons I suggest this:

• Ideally all of these changes will serve the purpose of allowing readers themselves to discern whether a reviewer is just up to tomfoolery.
• This one is optional, but you could also give readers reviewer status "well known reviewer" for their work as well, and show the Opinion / Objective ratio on their profiles as such. This way readers would know if a reviewer leans towards Opinion or Objectivity.
• Currently the ability to rate and review is too one sided, as reviewers can leave any rating they want and they don't have to worry about..well...anything. The only real way to fix this is to create a system that at the least, examines the ratings and reviews.

I'm not sure how much work or how feasible this would be, and I may just be thinking too much like a programmer to "patch" problems. But this is what I came up with. Thoughts?

This is actually a pretty good idea. For instance, reviewers, or I should say. Proper reviewers, even if opinionated will necessarily take the time to voice it. A word minimum will not be an issue in this case. Since a review stands by logic to properly show how it is perceived. Now, within this sense. There is a clear dividing line between facts and well lies. The author no doubt will be able to tell. They will also be able to tell if the message did not come across as intended. In a case like this, to prevent the author from abusing a feature of warning. A reason of accuracy must be stated on why. I believe this will help to solve both ends.

The reviewers having to choose between one or the other is a good touch. Since well, different types of readers. If I go and look at reviews, I rather not waste time trying to find out if it is objective or opinionated. I always look for objective reviews, which can become tiresome. Being able to mark as accurate and inaccurate can also help authors. Too many times have I seen readers simply try and destroy an author. Hell, they may not be readers, they tend to be writers from what I noticed. Once again, to avoid authors from abusing this feature. They should provide a reason why they are labeling it one way or another.

Step four is a pretty good contingency idea. It helps to further reinforce the point. While it has some holes. For instance, some may try to abuse one or the other. It can definitely work if the community is engaged enough to call out inaccuracy when they see it. The final one is a good addition. Hell, other reviewing sites has that feature, sometimes you just wanna thank them.

I have noticed when it comes to misinformation, people start to become quite defensive. Protecting it as if it is life or death. In all reality, while this can be a problem to widely prevent it. There is no need for such on let us say a writing/reading site. In the least trying to combat it can create a more welcoming community.

 

[Moonpearl]

That's actually false. Many people are capable of making objective decisions and reviews. People do it everyday, its only when their emotions get called into the mix that it becomes a problem. This is why entertainment can be inflamatory.

Facts can't be interpreted differently, because they are facts. What you're misconstruing as such is bias, which means you may not understand the true nature of bias. Any fact that can be interpreted differently aren't presenting the whole picture. I can think of dozens of examples on this.

It's literally why morons like to argue whether masks help during a pandemic. They do, point blank. There is no room for debate, because its simply not true that masks fail to help the issue. Same with social distancing and so on.

The second example of this is crime, particularly black on black crime. There is this notion that blacks are violent and dangerous because they make up a smaller percentage of the population while making up a larger percentage of people being placed in jail. Taken on its own from numbers and statistics, it looks convincing. That is until you realize that crime rates are related to poverty, and poverty in the U.S. is systematically enforced through various means to willfully incapacitate ethnic groups like natives and african americans.

Further enforced by BIAS of the public and police, who regularly arrest people of color for things that aren't even crimes many times. This is done specifically to inflate the first set of numbers, thereby making the ill informed feel "justified" in the way they view the police. This has been going on for almost 200 years, in fact the idea of "police" was formed to catch run away slaves. Did you know that?

The same "offenses" that people of European descent get a slap on the wrist for are harshly criticized or worse for POC. Example : RIOTING. Groups of white people have sabotaged movements, destroyed hundreds of thousands of dollars in store fronts and crippled business all in the last 3 weeks. You haven't heard a peep about it because, well..they aren't dark skinned. This happened as recently as just last week.

Your mindset sets a totally beneficial and completely biased framework in place where people should be forgiven for not acting objectively in situations of authority. Even if they do mess up, there should be no repercussions--right? That is, unless someone *else* messes up. Ironically enough, I doubt you'd be okay with being mistreated in such a situation by such people if you were on the opposite end.

Objectiveness isn't a lost art, people simply do what they want without accountability, which is what these suggested changes aim to circumvent. Creating a system that helps enforce objectivity even a little bit is the only way to fix the issue.




Even if it happens, the point of having them purposely mark their intent is so that people can make better informed decisions. In other words, this is exactly why I suggested it -- it becomes easier to see who's just full of it. By having them state their intent it becomes easier to see if they are just biased or at least attempting to stick to the content at hand.

You can't compare judgements on art to judgements on the real world.

Art is born in the land of subjectivity and that's where it will thrive. What the readers bring to your story, how they transform it in their minds, is as much as part of your novel as your own intentions, and they have the right to express how that went for them without the author breathing down their neck.

Just because you think that you wrote something X way, doesn't mean you actually did that. I can't count the number of times I or other writers wrote in the wrong tone, or forgot to put in a sentence that changed the whole context of a scene, or 100% failed to write a love relationship in a romance story.
Some authors will scream and cry and stamp their feet to hear they failed, because they think their author's vision trumps what they actually created.
It doesn't. The author's opinion is not more objective than a reader's.

And, again, who even wants an "objective" review? I don't ask my buddy how he liked the film he saw last week expecting him to give me some opinionless list of events that went down in it. That's a summary, not a review.
The director may feel sore about my friend's experience of the film, but that doesn't mean that he's wrong or that he's deceiving me. In all honesty, I trust the director less than I trust my friend. That's why I asked him and not the recording of the director tooting his own horn.

It would a miserable world if, before I gave my friends a review on a book or a film, I had to pass some test set by the creator or put a disclaimer that my words should count for less just because said creator feels I might be dangerously ~subjective~ when I speak.

Little to nothing is concrete in the world of art. It's something that people just have to learn to be comfortable with.

 

[Ral]

This is actually a pretty good idea. For instance, reviewers, or I should say. Proper reviewers, even if opinionated will necessarily take the time to voice it. A word minimum will not be an issue in this case. Since a review stands by logic to properly show how it is perceived. Now, within this sense. There is a clear dividing line between facts and well lies. The author no doubt will be able to tell. They will also be able to tell if the message did not come across as intended. In a case like this, to prevent the author from abusing a feature of warning. A reason of accuracy must be stated on why. I believe this will help to solve both ends.

You kinda missed something. If it is mandatory to give a review to rate, many people would just not rate. Of course, unless, you are fine with getting less ratings.

And no, authors is not always able to tell especially considering that it is the author's work at stake here. Consider this, what if I say in my review "the story bored me numb." Is it true or a lie? Did I really find the story boring or not? How can the author tell? The author can't because it is a statement of my own feelings and reaction to the story.

The reviewers having to choose between one or the other is a good touch. Since well, different types of readers. If I go and look at reviews, I rather not waste time trying to find out if it is objective or opinionated. I always look for objective reviews, which can become tiresome. Being able to mark as accurate and inaccurate can also help authors. Too many times have I seen readers simply try and destroy an author. Hell, they may not be readers, they tend to be writers from what I noticed. Once again, to avoid authors from abusing this feature. They should provide a reason why they are labeling it one way or another.

There is the like system in place. Just like the reviews that you find objective so that they get more emphasized.

On the other hand, even if you implement something like this, it doesn't stop such reviews from being made.

Also consider the reviews that essentially just says "the story is enjoyable" which is clearly an opinion. Being positive doesn't make a review objective, and with this feature, they are something that you should not bother looking at because they are opinions. Essentially, opinions doesn't have much value. Something seems wrong with this picture, doesn't it?

On the other hand, objectivity doesn't mean positive. In fact, if people are truly objective, then the reviews would mostly be negative (remember Sturgeon's Law). Most writers here are not skilled after all so the objective judgement would reflect this lack. Is that what you want?

You say that you want objectivity, but I highly doubt that. Sometimes, honesty is not what we actually want but the white lies. Everyone knows that the stories here aren't perfect, heck, we know they aren't even good; but, that doesn't mean we can't enjoy them. Our enjoyment isn't dictated by such things as objectivity.

And authors can be readers too. They are actually guaranteed to be readers since they are inspired to write from reading stories in the first place.

Step four is a pretty good contingency idea. It helps to further reinforce the point. While it has some holes. For instance, some may try to abuse one or the other. It can definitely work if the community is engaged enough to call out inaccuracy when they see it. The final one is a good addition. Hell, other reviewing sites has that feature, sometimes you just wanna thank them.

The fourth… we already have a similar feature with the like feature. You can sort the reviews based on how many likes it have.

On the other hand, how exactly would this feature work? The review would be like 45% objective and 65% opinion? 70% objective and 30% opinion? What does exactly does these numbers mean? Are they even accurate? How is these numbers exactly going to help you?

I have noticed when it comes to misinformation, people start to become quite defensive. Protecting it as if it is life or death. In all reality, while this can be a problem to widely prevent it. There is no need for such on let us say a writing/reading site. In the least trying to combat it can create a more welcoming community.

It is easy for us to judge from the outside but when we are involved, things aren't so clear cut anymore.

Say, you see a review that says "this is best story ever!," would you label it as an opinion (and a clearly inaccurate one at that) that it clearly is? What if you read a negative review that you think is quite accurate but the author doesn't like? Are you going to support the reviewer and mark it as accurate? Or you would just stay aside and do nothing as the review is voted down? Say, what if you write a review (especially if it is negative) where you try to be objective and accurate, but other people dismissed it as an inaccurate biased opinion? Can you guarantee yourself that you would reflect that you might not be objective and accurate as you think and accept the people's decision? Or you would think that the others are the ones who are misinformed?

And why is a feature that force reader to write a review if they want to rate makes for a more welcoming community? Why is a feature that lets people show their judgement about the accuracy or inaccuracy of your review creates a more welcoming community?

The thing is, it is not the features but the people in the community that makes the community welcoming. The features have very little to do with it. A start for a more welcoming community would be to become welcoming yourself and encourage others to be so.

Art is born in the land of subjectivity and that's where it will thrive. What the readers bring to your story, how they transform it in their minds, is as much as part of your novel as your own intentions, and they have the right to express how that went for them without the author breathing down their neck.

Death of the Author!

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Reviews? Which reviews are you talking about? I barely get any. We can talk about this issue when the number of reviews really becomes appreciable.

 

[Generic.Archdemon]

Hmm.... Despite knowing its time to move on... and being dangerously close to becoming a necromancer... I am still curious about this thing called an Objective Review....

So here is my proposal... someone suggests a novel... something, I need to at least have the complete resolution of the first inciting incident Tell me which chapter it's between. And I will review it. Objectively.

Then we can review my review to see if I succeed in writing an objective review or not. Fun right?

What do you folks think? Got me a suggestion?

 

[BenJepheneT]

Hmm.... Despite knowing its time to move on... and being dangerously close to becoming a necromancer... I am still curious about this thing called an Objective Review....

So here is my proposal... someone suggests a novel... something, I need to at least have the complete resolution of the first inciting incident Tell me which chapter it's between. And I will review it. Objectively.

Then we can review my review to see if I succeed in writing an objective review or not. Fun right?

What do you folks think? Got me a suggestion?

Would a short story work?

If you're asking, yes, I'm taking the opportunity to have some read my shit.