The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This is the thread for general chat.
Tell us how your day was, say hello or just introduce yourself if you're new to the site.
Post edited by Hmmm... on 29/12/2018 at 18:19.
Tell us how your day was, say hello or just introduce yourself if you're new to the site.
Post edited by Hmmm... on 29/12/2018 at 18:19.
Page:
Well if you'd prefer me to leave posts in the review forum that are completely useless, it's no skin off my nose. Just thought it would be helpful.
Don't really get where Garin is coming from with the forum nazi thing TBH.Anything I have ever seen Chris flag for removal from the review forum has been for one reason and that was that the posts he flagged were not reviews.If that was the case then surely he made the right call ? :S
My point was its hardly Freeola policy to delete them because their quality isnt sufficient. Suddenly it seems we have a user enacted culling of posts that dont meet their standards.
Garin wrote:
Is this sort of quality control really the job of the moderators? After all the GAD submission advice just says short reviews are unlikely to gain rewards. It doesnt say the forum nazis will be along to remove their posts because it doesnt meet some qualitive criteria.
Granted Garin....it may not actually say it and the content of the winning GAD reviews are testament to it but the problem is...how many new 'reviewers' actually read the GAD submission advice? It's just a case of " I'm new and want to post a thread so this seems like the easiest way ". Mind you, most of the 'new reviewers' in recent months aren't usually here to 'make meaningful input to the Forums' anyway :¬)
Is this sort of quality control really the job of the moderators? After all the GAD submission advice just says short reviews are unlikely to gain rewards. It doesnt say the forum nazis will be along to remove their posts because it doesnt meet some qualitive criteria.
Granted Garin....it may not actually say it and the content of the winning GAD reviews are testament to it but the problem is...how many new 'reviewers' actually read the GAD submission advice? It's just a case of " I'm new and want to post a thread so this seems like the easiest way ". Mind you, most of the 'new reviewers' in recent months aren't usually here to 'make meaningful input to the Forums' anyway :¬)
Garin wrote:
Is this sort of quality control really the job of the moderators? After all the GAD submission advice just says short reviews are unlikely to gain rewards.
Well I see the primary objective of the review forum to be a forum full of useful reviews. A GAD is something nice to get, but primarily, a review should be for other users benefit.
Is this sort of quality control really the job of the moderators? After all the GAD submission advice just says short reviews are unlikely to gain rewards.
Well I see the primary objective of the review forum to be a forum full of useful reviews. A GAD is something nice to get, but primarily, a review should be for other users benefit.
Sonic Chris wrote:
... Have done a small update to the post.[/i]
Hopefully you've managed to get the comments you mentioned earlier across in your edit?
It probably wouldn't hurt to add a new post reiterating whatever the issue was to highlight it and so that the thread has a 'new' marker put on it and an updated date etc.
... Have done a small update to the post.[/i]
Hopefully you've managed to get the comments you mentioned earlier across in your edit?
It probably wouldn't hurt to add a new post reiterating whatever the issue was to highlight it and so that the thread has a 'new' marker put on it and an updated date etc.
[s]Hmmm...[/s]
Is this sort of quality control really the job of the moderators? After all the GAD submission advice just says short reviews are unlikely to gain rewards. It doesnt say the forum nazis will be along to remove their posts because it doesnt meet some qualitive criteria.
Maybe some sort of minimum word count could be introduced? There must be some way to block really short reviews using this method.
I remember there used to be a max word count on SR and the review wouldn't go through if you went over the limit. So surely there must be a way to make that work in reverse?
I remember there used to be a max word count on SR and the review wouldn't go through if you went over the limit. So surely there must be a way to make that work in reverse?
Hmmm... wrote:
Re @Sonic Chris
If I'm looking in the right area how about getting this post updated: New Reviews - Please read before posting ???
Most of it is essentially correct, although there are a few key points missing. Might alter it slightly, but not too drastically.
*EDIT* Have done a small update to the post. Wondering if there is anyway to set it up so that new users (30 days or less) get directed to that page when they try to write a review for the first time.
Re @Sonic Chris
If I'm looking in the right area how about getting this post updated: New Reviews - Please read before posting ???
[s]Hmmm...[/s]Most of it is essentially correct, although there are a few key points missing. Might alter it slightly, but not too drastically.
*EDIT* Have done a small update to the post. Wondering if there is anyway to set it up so that new users (30 days or less) get directed to that page when they try to write a review for the first time.
Re @Sonic Chris
I'm glad it wasn't me being thick (not being able to find your comments!) ;¬)
If I'm looking in the right area how about getting this post updated: New Reviews - Please read before posting ???
But I appreciate it's still asking a lot - hence my frequent 'IQ Test' when new people sign up... :¬P
I'm glad it wasn't me being thick (not being able to find your comments!) ;¬)
If I'm looking in the right area how about getting this post updated: New Reviews - Please read before posting ???
But I appreciate it's still asking a lot - hence my frequent 'IQ Test' when new people sign up... :¬P
[s]Hmmm...[/s] Page: