Messages

Reviewing - a condition of membership?

<< Thread Modifed March 11 at 11:58AM >>

---

Spurred on by Karen Cherry Threadgill's excellent verse ('Elemental Education' - or Etiquette, my suggestion! If you haven't read this wonderful satirical verse - please do), I've come increasingly to the view that a minimum number of reviews per month should be a condition of membership. This is a community, after all, that works together to inspire, educate and encourage. Otherwise (as with the subject of the poem) we're solely receiving and giving nothing back or learning from others! Buying dollars in cash is often beyond most of us and then to use that purchased privilege to pump so high that everyone else is obliged to spend even more of their 'hard earned' virtual dollars is a travesty and not in the spirit that we expect!) Failing to respond to reviews simply compounds this kind of arrogance. I know money drives business but I don't think it would be too much to ask of a site that promotes itself on providing feedback.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

What happens if someone is elderly and sick, hospitalized, and therefore cannot review a certain number of entries? What if that person has been on the site and participating for many years? Should they be kicked off the site because they did not meet the quota this year?

No, certainly not!

I totally disagree with this idea and I am sure the site will not change the rules to include a required amount of reviews because it would lose members and the site would have extra work to keep track of everyone's number of reviews. Therefore, it would cost the site money and undoubtedly raise the cost of site membership for those who manage to keep meeting the quota.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

No. I have to say that I categorically disagree with original poster on this thread. Mostly what I read are their "personal" opinions, and how they view the site, it's reason for being and the responsibility of the members. Zero facts, a lot of conjecture and projection of their beliefs.

No. Members who use cash or promote highly does not prevent others from doing anything nor does it force others to do the same. Every Premier member pays for membership and are free to use the site services (reviewing, replying or not) as they see fit. As long as members follow the FS rules, they are good.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

Ok point taken, it would be a bit unwieldy (not impossible) but how else am I to air my views but from a personal perspective? (What an odd thing to say!) I still maintain there should be more initial emphasis/encouragement on reviewing from the ownership. It took me ages, when I first started, to be advised that I had to do a lot of reviewing to get anything vaguely noticed. And I'm sure a lot of newbies, on a trial basis, would be tempted to give up out of sheer frustration. That's a shame because it's an invaluable tool to get to know others' work and learn from it. And that's what we're here for I thought. Otherwise we could save our money and stay at home writing in gloriously ignorant bliss.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

Hi Debbie-

I understand your frustration. This matter has come up several times since I joined in 2007.

I once belonged to another poetry site that mandated you could not post another thing until you both replied to a review and did a "return review."

Not surprisingly, people groused that they'd paid their dues and shouldn't be forced to do anything...

The head of the site held fast. The site folded within six months.

I'd love it if everyone participated in every facet, but as others have pointed out, sometimes there are personal reasons why this is not possible.

(Or the member is not interested in reviewing or replying)

The revenue the site brings in from people willing to pay upwards of $100 member dollars to lift their post to number one is "real" cash.

It is irksome when we try to promote with our "review-earnings" and barely crack the top ten--but money talks!

We have the option of not reviewing the posts in question. (Then again, it's tough to pass up $1.26 for one review!)

I'm glad you vented! It's good to hear all sides of an issue on-site...

Newbies learn pretty quickly to promote if they want more than a few reviews. Some are very content to post for years and receive two to five reviews.

On the other hand, I know of several members who spend well over $500 a month promoting.

As for me? I review until I have enough money to promote!

I'm guessing if the site weren't bringing in these profits, then the membership fee would be much higher.

I guess we'll all do what we can... I know you always reply to reviews, and I appreciate that. I try to review something from each reviewer who visits my work.

Those of us that stay, do so as much for the writers we've grown to love, and the relationships made as anything else, in my opinion.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

Hi Debbie. There is a welcoming committee and from your comments I think it is safe to say you were not welcomed. Neither was I because apparently I was "too pretty" to have ever had anything bad happen to me. *cough*

Approximately 70 new members pay for and join FanStory every month. Clearly that is a mammoth amount of new people and there must be a way to weed out those who will not fit into the community. Ergo the bad review.

We can only hope that the powers who be have put people in places of authority who are professional, knowledgeable, unbiased and dedicated to the business model. If you get a stupid, empire building person in a power position they must be rooted out before they rot the whole barrel of apples.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

I can see both sides and I often feel mildly guilty at reviewing less than I think I should. My excuse is that I work as an editor and after a day of editing-for-pay, I sometimes feel tapped out. Also, I read a lot of good stuff here but am, stymied about what to say. If it's a 5-7-5 and it works... what can one say? A lot of reviewers pad their reviews with remarks such as Good luck in the contest-- )Yay! Half a line! Trouble is, they use it whether it's a contest entry or not. Otherwise, they wish me a good day...
I try never to do that. When I review I try to say something specific and pertinent and maybe helpful. Anyhow, I am making a new resolution. I'm currently posting every day for a contest and I will, for the rest of this month and all of next, make at least one review per post. Beyond that... who knows. Life happens.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

Since highly detailed reviews are appreciated by a number of folks here, and by the site, improvements are needed for the site to retain and grow its top reviewers.

The reviewer who spends one minute earns the same as someone who pores over a piece for 1-2 hours providing the author with major tips for how to up their game, providing extensive examples. In the best-case scenario of winning the reviewing contests, the payout for me is still less than a buck an hour, plus whatever member bucks are left.

One or two members have graciously donated me a slew of cent pumps when they make their nominations. More folks would need to do this for the level of reviewing that I try to provide to be sustainable. If the site is listening, here are some ideas for an upgraded reviewing system:

-provide a higher reward than two cents for rating old works. Cap the number of reviews that can be submitted for one user's works from another user per day to prevent this from being abused (a user using new bot accounts to pump up their old works).

-Increase the number of complimentary reviews from two to three. (I think that sometimes it ends up being 3+ free because multiple readers are reviewing the same piece simultaneously, and the site doesn't check the server for the rating count when the rating is submitted, but rather when loading the initial review page. But usually I just get two for free.)

-If someone who has just joined the site is dispensing one and two-star reviews en masse, this should trigger an automatic flag.

-use AI to rate the quality of the review, and award a higher cent bonus and probability of cent pump based on the index awarded. I have a hunch that the site might already be doing the latter as I have had a bunch of wins in a row for longer reviews, but this does not necessarily seem to be consistent.

-reviewing longer works should provide the reviewer with an award multiplier if their review reflects that they clearly read through and responded to the piece in its entirety. There needs to be a way to incentivize reviewers to get through the longer works, and maybe the authors need to pay more for it. If AI can't properly evaluate this yet at cost, it should be able to do it within a year. Basic programming without AI can already determine based on page scrolling activity whether a reader has really read a work.

-Finally, the site could include a mechanism other than the seal of quality for readers to pay specific reviewers for detailed feedback. This would be invaluable, and I could actually justify spending my time reviewing here if I was better compensated for it.

My subscription is up for renewal and I'll be letting it expire in two days, as I have other things I need to do over the coming months. I'll be watching to see if the site makes improvements, and hope to return.

🦍

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

Don't know if you're still here, SS, but the site used to give three free reviews.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

I don't believe reviewing should be made compulsory but it should be encouraged. Last week I boosted up a poem to $1 paid per review and got 30 plus reviews. This week I have done the same and I am struggling at around 10 reviews with a day left. I have no idea what drew people to review one and not the other.

I have also just had a flash fiction piece win a competition that also pays out a $1 per read that is also at 10 reviews. It is great to win pretend money but it is the reviews that mean the most to me and it is dispiriting to go to bed and wake up to see you have no new readers.

The only way I can see it happening is to give greater rewards to reviewers. I won a banner through reviewing, used it and have no idea what it is and it seems to have made no difference to the numbers.
I must do well over 100 reviews each week and get 30 back, Soul destroying.

RE: Reviewing - a condition of membership?

---

I had the same thing happen. Two weeks ago, for the first time, I put a piece up for just over $1. It even sat in the first spot for awhile when all the super high ones expired. I got 10 reviews total, while all the pieces around mine were way higher. I assume people didn't like it and preferred to pass instead of comment. So it wasn't worth the extra promotion for me.