Require reviews when rating

[Skim]

Thanks to all the feedback from those willing to reply I've got an answer as to why we don't require reviews when rating. The main reason for anyone wondering is, as of yet, there is no solution that is much better than the current system. Anything will have its ups and downs, and with the current system the flaws are evident, but the benefits are just as strong if not stronger.

Spoiler: Original Post

I know this isn't the first discussion about the topic, but I was just hoping for a clear answer as to why something like requiring a review when rating a story low hasn't been implemented. It could even be made so that the review had to be at least 30 words. A few reasons I have to support this are(Didn’t mean to make this sound so snobbish):

1. Whether someone rates your story high or low, feedback is always appreciated. Replies/ratings should be from people who have read enough of your work to voice genuine complements/critiques.
2. It would reduce the number of bad reviews people give without good reason.
3. It would help the rating system become more trustworthy.
4. It would allow people to understand if people are rating a series objectively or subjectively.
5. Before clicking on a story the number of ratings isn't shown, so fewer reviews wouldn't have a negative impact here.

Disadvantages(so far)

1. Leaving bad reviews could lead to targeting and unwarranted backlash on series of the reviewer. Allowing anonymous reviewing might be necessary.

If anyone else has points I will add them to this list.

I also understand that Scribblehub isn't a daycare and criticism is a large part of being a writer, but the feeling of getting a bad review without knowing the reason can be difficult to deal with. A fresh feeling for me as I just got my first 1 star, which is obviously the reason why I felt like writing this post. I fully accept that I probably deserve the rating I got, but I would just like to know where I could improve. And as much as my writing is fueled by annoyance I also feel that this is a reasonable request, although I'd feel bad if it increased Tony's workload by too much.

Another alternative which Discount_Blade mentioned was:

“...do as RRL does and add stars as apart of the actual review process instead of it being separate, meaning you can ONLY LEAVE STARS WHEN WRITING A REVIEW. And the reviews have to be of a certain length though I don't remember how many characters it was.

Someone once mentioned it had to be no less than 450 characters in a review though I can't swear to the accuracy of that.”

 

[K5Rakitan]

But . . . but my collection!

 

[Skim]

But . . . but my collection!

 

[GDLiZy]

If you're going to require a review upon a rating, you must insist for every rating, not just arbitrarily decided that 1* alone deserves it. 1* ratings are just as valid as 5* ratings. It's scummy to force someone to go to a greater length to vote low than to vote high.

 

[Deleted member 29316]

If you're going to require a review upon a rating, you must insist for every rating, not just arbitrarily decided that 1* alone deserves it. 1* ratings are just as valid as 5* ratings. It's scummy to force someone to go to a greater length to vote low than to vote high.

Not to mention, such system is prone to abuse. Like when you require a 1* rating review, the reader would just select the next low, which is 2*.

 

[Deleted member 45782]

I know this isn't the first discussion about the topic, but I was just hoping for a clear answer as to why something like requiring a review when rating a story low hasn't been implemented. It could even be made so that the review had to be at least 30 words. A few reasons I have to support this are:

1. If someone rates a story high it means you are doing fine already and don't need as much criticism.
2. If someone feels your story deserves a low rating it means you have things to work on, which a proper review would obviously help with.
3. It would reduce the number of bad reviews people give without good reason.
4. It takes away the anonymity which people often hide behind.
5. It would help the rating system become more trustworthy.
6. It would allow people to understand if people are eating a series objectively or subjectively.

If anyone else has points I will add them to this list.

I also understand that Scribblehub isn't a daycare and criticism is a large part of being a writer, but the feeling of getting a bad review without knowing the reason can be difficult to deal with. A fresh feeling for me as I just got my first 1 star, which is obviously the reason why I felt like writing this post. But as much as my writing is fueled by annoyance I also feel that this is a reasonable request, although I'd feel bad if it increased Tony's workload by too much.

That is bias. It sounds like filtering and a very flawed one at that.

Rather than only making bad ratings be required to write a review, it should be All ratings required to write a review.

That way bad reviews - you hear why they dislike it and possibly the flaws of the story, and the good reviews- you hear why readers like the story and what strengths you have.

To put bad ratings only required bad reviews isn't great. Lots of times we see 5 star ratings on books/apps/etc. and they don't have an explanation as to why its good; sometimes we're not even sure if those ratings are real..

Also, requiring bad ratings to give you bad reviews...if they already find distaste in that story, and in a foul mood from it, and you require them to give you a review...will they give you an honest review of why the story is flawed or will it be just them saying the worst things perhaps not even related to your story?

 

[Skim]

That is bias. It sounds like filtering and a very flawed one at that.

Rather than only making bad ratings be required to write a review, it should be All ratings required to write a review.

That way bad reviews - you hear why they dislike it and possibly the flaws of the story, and the good reviews- you hear why readers like the story and what strengths you have.

To put bad ratings only required bad reviews isn't great. Lots of times we see 5 star ratings on books/apps/etc. and they don't have an explanation as to why its good; sometimes we're not even sure if those ratings are real..

Also, requiring bad ratings to give you bad reviews...if they already find distaste in that story, and in a foul mood from it, and you require them to give you a review...will they give you an honest review of why the story is flawed or will it be just them saying the worst things perhaps not even related to your story?

Very good points, I'll adjust my post accordingly. The last point is something that would be fixed if you reported it, which sadly would increase the workload of those running the site, but similar problems already happen.

 

[Skim]

If you're going to require a review upon a rating, you must insist for every rating, not just arbitrarily decided that 1* alone deserves it. 1* ratings are just as valid as 5* ratings. It's scummy to force someone to go to a greater length to vote low than to vote high.

Great point.

 

[Discount_Blade]

I've ranted about people complaining about 1-stars they "didn't deserve", but then not saying a word to the 5-stars that I know damn well they didn't deserve either because the story was an utter mess, so I'll avoid doing that now. It's clear bias, and I do not in any way agree with this post. Personally, I want the star ratings system gone altogether. Leave it at reviews and comments. Or do as RRL does and add stars as apart of the actual review process instead of it being separate, meaning you can ONLY LEAVE STARS WHEN WRITING A REVIEW. And the reviews have to be of a certain length though I don't remember how many characters it was.

Someone once mentioned it had to be no less than 450 characters in a review though I can't swear to the accuracy of that.

 

[CL]

After reading so many of these threads, I'm guessing that RRL has the best rating system going for them right now. The thought I am concerned about is if we would be receiving any type of retaliation if Tony does decides to say: "Hey, why not? Let's do this!"

Anybody here know whether we'd get into any trouble for mirroring RRL's rating/reviewing system?

 

[Discount_Blade]

After reading so many of these threads, I'm guessing that RRL has the best rating system going for them right now. The thought I am concerned about is if we would be receiving any type of retaliation if Tony does decides to say: "Hey, why not? Let's do this!"

Anybody here know whether we'd get into any trouble for mirroring RRL's rating/reviewing system?

Doubt it. You can't copyright a review system. That's like suing a company for the way they arrange/label their employment forms because they look similar to the way yours do.

 

[CL]

Doubt it. You can't copyright a review system. That's like suing a company for the way they arrange/label their employment forms

That means we can rule out any legal actions. Would you believe RRL (the admins or their members) be upset at us for copying it?

 

[Discount_Blade]

That means we can rule out any legal actions. Would you believe RRL (the admins or their members) be upset at us for copying it?

Can't imagine so. I mean Tony basically copied a lot of Novelupdate for SH, and he doesn't own NU does he? Not in the way he owns SH. It was explained to me that the forums are basically carbon copies of NU's. Not that I've been to NU forums or even have an account. Though numerous people here that do have accounts there have mentioned the similarities since Tony is also present on that site as well.

 

[Omnifarious]

I mean Tony basically copied a lot of Novelupdate for SH, and he doesn't own NU does he? Not in the way he owns SH

Pretty sure Tony own its the same way, as in built it, knows all the passwords, rents all the servers, pay for all the xenforo subs and have complete tyrannical control over both sites.

 

[Discount_Blade]

Pretty sure Tony own its the same way, as in built, owns all the passwords, rents all the servers, pay for all the xenforo subs and have complete tyrannical control over both sites.

Thought he was just one of the bigger mods in NU while he owned SH. ALrighty then. Either way, no one can do anything about having a similar review system. Doesn't even make sense how they could or would even bother saying anything at all. I mean, there aren't but so many ways you can write a review.

 

[Omnifarious]

Either way, no one can do anything about having a similar review system.

Fully agree.

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

I'm guessing that RRL has the best rating system going for them right now.

Say.... for the uneducated... Like I... who won't know what the RRL system is even if I am trapped in a paper bag with it for a whole month in solitary confinement...

What is the RRL system?

Or would you rather I make tracks, go over there... make an account and try using it?

 

[Deleted member 45782]

I know this isn't the first discussion about the topic, but I was just hoping for a clear answer as to why something like requiring a review when rating a story low hasn't been implemented. It could even be made so that the review had to be at least 30 words. A few reasons I have to support this are:

1. If someone rates a story high it means you are doing fine already and don't need as much criticism, but the feedback on what you're doing correctly is always nice.
2. If someone feels your story deserves a low rating it means you have things to work on, which a proper review would obviously help with.
3. It would reduce the number of bad reviews people give without good reason.
4. It takes away the anonymity which people often hide behind.
5. It would help the rating system become more trustworthy.
6. It would allow people to understand if people are rating a series objectively or subjectively.
7. Before clicking on a story the number of ratings isn't shown, so fewer reviews wouldn't have a negative impact here.

If anyone else has points I will add them to this list.

I also understand that Scribblehub isn't a daycare and criticism is a large part of being a writer, but the feeling of getting a bad review without knowing the reason can be difficult to deal with. A fresh feeling for me as I just got my first 1 star, which is obviously the reason why I felt like writing this post. But as much as my writing is fueled by annoyance I also feel that this is a reasonable request, although I'd feel bad if it increased Tony's workload by too much.

If you had written make all ratings require a review, whether its a 5* or a 1* review, I would have agreed.
However, even after editing your thread, the way you want reviews is still heavily flawed.

1 and 2 should be combined. Just because you're "great," does not mean you don't need as much criticism. Good or bad, we want to know what works and what didn't work. You can't just hear the good or single out the bad. If you want, then make it for all reviews. I also imagine there are people that think they are "great" and don't need all that criticism when the reality is their story...kinda horrible.

4. This is seriously? Taking away the anonymity people leave behind - people don't like that and for one its gonna be added a lot more bias just because of the reader's profile and who they are. And if the author and the fans of the story don't like it, now it seems much easier for them to go after these readers - why would anyone leave a review then? You'll only hear good reviews...cause the ones that will give you the critical feedback that you may need to hear to improve your story .. are hesitant because of this. If you want reviews for ratings, you're gonna probably want the option to let people stay anonymous reviews...

 

[BenJepheneT]

No. We like the site's mechanic as it is right now. Does it suck? Yes. Does your idea make it suck even more? Yes.

So take it as the lesser of two evil. So far, nobody's given a better idea, so we're sticking to this shitpen we've got until someone docks their penis into another guy's foreskin and gets that Eureka™ epiphany.

'Till then, shut up and chill with us. We've got a cocktail bar, potluck, and that ballpit from Dashcon.

 

[Skim]

If you had written make all ratings require a review, whether its a 5* or a 1* review, I would have agreed.
However, even after editing your thread, the way you want reviews is still heavily flawed.

1 and 2 should be combined. Just because you're "great," does not mean you don't need as much criticism. Good or bad, we want to know what works and what didn't work. You can't just hear the good or single out the bad. If you want, then make it for all reviews. I also imagine there are people that think they are "great" and don't need all that criticism when the reality is their story...kinda horrible.

4. This is seriously? Taking away the anonymity people leave behind - people don't like that and for one its gonna be added a lot more bias just because of the reader's profile and who they are. And if the author and the fans of the story don't like it, now it seems much easier for them to go after these readers - why would anyone leave a review then? You'll only hear good reviews...cause the ones that will give you the critical feedback that you may need to hear to improve your story .. are hesitant because of this. If you want reviews for ratings, you're gonna probably want the option to let people stay anonymous reviews...

I tried to combine 1 and 2 please let me know what you think.

Great point about the anonymity, didn’t think about that. I took that part down and but it under disadvantages, let me know if that fixes some of the problems with the post.