Website reviews.

[S7even]

In the "important" post in the website reviews forum is written: "We will endeavour to deal with your request within 72 hours."

I checked some of the threads there, and while some of them seem to apear the same day, some others take 10 days+ (I compared the initial post date and the first reply date, i guess thats quite reliable?).

While this is ok for personal sites, if you need a review for a commercial site, were you have schedule and deadlines, waiting for so long renders this feature much less helpful.

I understand that all the work is done by volunteers, so I am not saying that they should work more or anything. But maybe the whole system needs to change.

Sure, threads now get a bunch of reviews, but more than 2/3 of them say nothing useful, many times they just agree with what people above said without adding anything new.

I believe this review exchange should be done in a "free market" way rather than a controled one. People in the forums know each other, so I will know if memeber "X" is giving good helpful reviews, so when he post a site for review I will reply, knowing that if my review was helpful enough he will review my site when i need it also. Maybe you can PM the members that gave you a helpful review with something like "Thanks, PM me if you ever need a review from me" so the member can "pay back" even if he is not browsing the particular forum at that time.

To new members we can be more flexible, but also suggest that if they want more replies they should give quality reviews to others.

I believe that this way we will be able to get feedback faster and of higher quality (which metters more than quantity).

[kish]

Sure, threads now get a bunch of reviews, but more than 2/3 of them say nothing useful, many times they just agree with what people above said without adding anything new.

I disagree.

If you're going to have your site reviewed then its important, statistically speaking, to get as many as possible even if most of them do agree with what others have said.

For example:
1 person gives a thorough explanation of why your navigation system is hard to use and 5 people agree with him/her.
Then 1 person gives a thorough explanation of why your navigation system is easy to use and 15 people agree with him.

People simply agreeing or disagreeing with another post adds weight and relevance. You can't really believe that there are only a few opinions on SP that count and that everyone else's doesn't because you don't know them or their design abilities.

You are going to get a lot of different types of visitors to ur site so its important to get a reviews from a lot of different types of reviewers!

APART from that, i agree that it is pretty annoying to wait 10+ days to get a review request posted (i know because i have been waiting over a week for one right now).
Obviously the idea of new threads being moderated is that the mods need to check that review requesters have made at least 3 reviews of other sites. HOWEVER, there must be a better (and quicker!) method of doing this.
Maybe it would be more efficient to do this:
Let people post new requests for reviews without having to check up on them first. Instead, have a counter next to their avatar or sumthin that lists the number of posts they have made within the "reviews" section of the forum. That way other community members can see for themselves if the review request is from someone who gets involved and helps other people out. That way, we can decide for ourselves whether or not to reciprocate by reviewing their site for them.

What do others reckon?

[SJH]

But remember a lot of reviews that people post are not helpful at all, I've seen lots of posts that basically just say "I like the site, it's good" - which aren't helpful at all. They don't say what parts of the site the 'reviewer' liked and didn't give any suggestions. So if your idea was implemented then people would do this and get away with it.

-Sam

[Chuckie]

One way to solve this problem ( I am suprised it hasn't been done already) is to automate this process. Create a "web review" bot. One that looks for key words and length. Once it finds these key words and the required length in 3 or more posts it allows your site to be posted and hence reviewed.

[kish]

One way to solve this problem ( I am suprised it hasn't been done already) is to automate this process. Create a "web review" bot. One that looks for key words and length. Once it finds these key words and the required length in 3 or more posts it allows your site to be posted and hence reviewed.

Wouldn't that be a bit of a drain on server resources?

How about we just trust other members to weed out the people that don't bother reviewing others' websites. It would be a lot quicker than waiting a week for the mod's to do it (which must be a bit of a bore for them too).
Would be interested to know how many review requests the mod's actually deny...

[SJH]

I had a request denied when I first joined the forums as I had basically typed three one-liners for other reviews

-Sam

[kish]

I had a request denied when I first joined the forums as I had basically typed three one-liners for other reviews [img]images/smilies/blush.gif[/img]

-Sam

SHAME on you!

[SJH]

Hehe... I've learned my lesson now though

-Sam

[Saz]

Would be interested to know how many review requests the mod's actually deny...

You'd be surprised. A great many people post a request without reviewing anything first and a good percentage of those who do carry out 3 reviews think one liners are going to cut it. (Not a dig at you Sam. ).

Yes, this is an issue that needs to be resolved as the queue should be dealt with much quicker than it is right now, however, I'm not sure that making that forum a free-for-all would be the solution.

I will mention this thread to the other staff and see what we can come up with. In the mean time, your suggestions are welcome and will be considered when and if changes are made.

[earther]

. . . the queue should be dealt with much quicker than it is right now . . .

I couldn't agree more! I like to do reviews but it's difficult when a big batch gets posted at once. There were well over a dozen new reviews posted today after about a week of no new reviews. That makes it quite difficult to go through all of them. In fact, it's downright frustrating. It would be so much better for all concerned if fewer reviews could be posted at a time but more frequently.

[M. Johansson]

The reason the queue is slow is because it's a pain in the **** to deal with, and a very boring job. We are working on making it more painless to work with.

[earther]

The reason the queue is slow is because it's a pain in the **** to deal with, and a very boring job. We are working on making it more painless to work with.

I'm not as concerned so much about the slowness - except when I've posted for a review, of course - as the regularity of the new review posts. I can really appreciate that the mod's job is not an easy one. But wouldn't it be less of a PITA to OK a few at a time? It would certainly be much easier to digest than 15 all at once. It would be better for the reviewers and probably produce more consistent reviews too.